Proceedings of

UNESCO Chair Programme on

Cultural Heritage and Risk Management

INTERNATIONAL TRAINING
COURSE (ITC) on DISASTER RISKMANAGEMENT of
CULTURAL HERITAGE,
Ritsumeikan University
2019, 14th year

From 9th September to 30th September 2019
At Kyoto and Hyogo, Japan

Organized by Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural
Heritage, Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH), Kyoto, JapanIn Cooperation with UNESCO, ICCROM and its regional office inSharjah, ICOM, ICOMOS / ICORP
Financially supported by (FY2019) Official Development Assistancefor UNESCO Activities, the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports,
Science and Technology (MEXT), Japan
Sponsored by NOHMI BOSAI LTD.

Date of Publication: February 2020
Published by: Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University
58 Komatsubara Kitamachi, Kita-ku, Kyoto 603-8341 Japan
In cooperation with: UNESCO
ICCROM and its regional office in Sharjah
ICOM
ICOMOS / ICORP
Financially supported by (FY 2019) Official Development Assistance for UNESCO Activities, the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), Japan
Sponsored by NOHMI BOSAI LTD.
Authors: Participants of ITC2019 and A Former participant of ITC
Coordinated by: Rohit JIGYASU, UNESCO Chair Holder, ICCROM Project Manager
Dowon KIM, UNESCO Chair Holder, Associate Professor, Ritsumeikan University
Edited by: Rohit JIGYASU, UNESCO Chair Holder, ICCROM Project Manager
Dowon KIM, UNESCO Chair Holder, Associate Professor, Ritsumeikan University
Wesley Webb CHEEK, Researcher (JSPS Post Doctral Fellowship)
Miho HAYASE, Administrative Staff of R-DMUCH
An Administrative Office of R-DMUCH
Layout by: Miho HAYASE, Administrative Staff of R-DMUCH
Printed by: HOKUTO Printing Co., Ltd.
38-2 Shimogamo Takagi-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto Japan© All rights reserved.
No part of this book may be reproduced, restored in retrieval system, or transmitted in any form without the written
permission from the Publisher.

Preface
The “Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH)”

was established as a permanent research institution in 2013 and has handed over activities from former

organization as “Research Center for Disaster Mitigation of Urban Cultural Heritage” which was started by
Prof. Kenzo Toki from 2003.

The “UNESCO Chair International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage”
started from 2006 as one of our important educational activities, and fortunately we can continue it
up to this year supported by UNESCO, ICCROM and its regional office in Sharjah, ICOM, ICOMOS/ICORP
and various national and international organizations. And we are very much fortunate for NICH (theIndependent Administrative Institution National Institutes for Cultural Heritage in Japan) has supported
us to provide the educational resources and lessons which are the integrated protection systems of
movable heritage in Japan, by the lectures and visiting the Kyoto National Museum. I would like to thankthese colleagues for supporting us and participants from all over the world. The purposes of this training
course are education of practical experts in each field of cultural heritage conservation and disaster risk
management, and development of draft plan for disaster risk management to secure the safety of people
and cultural value in each cultural heritage site and historical city. I hope these plans to be actual projects
in each country and contribute to cultural advancement in the world.
ITC 2019 has been sponsored by the Japanese National Commission for UNESCO, and NOHMI BOSAI LTD.
as a fire protection system company. I sincerely appreciate to the sponsorship that provides the important
opportunity all the participants to learn from the training course.
Through the ITC in 2019 with theme as “Integrated Protection of Immovable and Movable Cultural
Heritage from Disasters”, most of participants thought about developing their case project toward
multiple and simultaneous disaster risk, and both immovable and movable heritage. The outcomes wereremarkable although the training is short period, and some of participants already began their projectin their site. Moreover, we already listen the news from 2019 participants to develop the international
projects which are great initiatives by the former participants.
Thank you all again for supporting this activity, and please keep in touch with us for inheriting cultural
heritage for next generation.

Takeyuki OKUBO
Director, R-DMUCH
Professor, Department of Environmental and Civil Engineering, Ritsumeikan University

Preface
The year 2019 has yet again witnessed dramatic loss of cultural heritage due to disasters around the world.
On 26th November, a 6.4 magnitude earthquake damaged historic walls and buildings of the medieval
port city of Durres in Albania. Less than a month before this disaster, in the early hours of 31st October, adevastating fire ravaged Shuri Castle of the World Heritage Site of Gusuku sites and related Properties of
the Kingdom of Ryukyu at the Island of Okinawa in Japan. Earlier this year, a ferocious blaze on 15th April
devastated world famous Notre Dame Cathedral in the heart of Paris, France.
All these unfortunate incidents as well as many others that have previously damaged rich and diverse
cultural heritage around the world serve to remind us that we need to act fast to implement sufficientmeasures to reduce risks to movable and immovable cultural heritage from disasters caused by natural
hazards such as earthquakes, the tsunami, floods, typhoons, landslides and forest fires. Besides cultural
heritage in various parts of the world have also suffered enormous damages due to human induced
hazards like arson, vandalism, terrorism and conflicts, such as in the case of Aleppo and Palmyra in Syria,
Mosul in Iraq, Timbuktu Shrines in Mali and Bamiyan Buddhas in Afghanistan. Often disasters and conflicts
also affect the intangible cultural heritage consisting of traditional knowledge, practices, skills and crafts
that ensure cultural continuity, as well as the means for its protection and maintenance. Needless to say,disasters not only cause material damage but also put the lives of visitors, staff and local communities inand around Cultural heritage Properties at risk. These also affect the livelihoods linked to heritage andthe revenues generated by the local government and the private sector through tourism. Finally, thepsychological impact on communities due to loss of heritage to which they are closely associated cannot
be underestimated. Moreover, damages to cultural landscapes and local flora and fauna in general cause
loss of valued ecosystem services thereby putting long term sustainability of local communities at risk.
Furthermore, Climate change is increasing the number of disasters and their devastating impacts. From1988 to 2007, 76 percent of all disaster events were hydro-meteorological in nature. These accounted for
45 percent of the deaths and 79 percent of the economic losses caused by natural hazards.i The likelihoodof increased weather extremes such as heavy downpours, heat waves, and strong hurricanes and cyclones
therefore gives great concern that the number or scale of weather-related disasters will also increase.
These hazards are also adversely impacting cultural heritage sites. For example, a cloudburst in Leh,
India in August 2010 caused flashfloods due to unprecedented heavy rains which caused destruction ofvernacular adobe heritage. Storms in western Europe earlier that year flooded many historic town centers,such as Paris, France; York, United Kingdom; and Lisbon and Porto, Portugal. Undoubtedly, climate change
is increasing the number of disasters and their impacts on cultural heritage.
Considering the above mentioned challenges, disaster risk management of cultural heritage is need of
the hour. On one hand, this would necessitate each heritage site and museum to have its own disaster risk
management plan that is tailored to its specific characteristics and hazards to which it is exposed. On theother hand, cultural heritage needs to be well integrated into overall disaster risk management policies
and plans at national, regional and local levels. Fortunately, cultural heritage has now been explicitly
recognized in the Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction adopted in 2015 by United Nations Officeof Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR), which gives strong leverage to mainstreaming of cultural heritage
into national disaster risk management policies.
Moreover heritage sites and museums should undergo integrated risk assessment that takes into accountmultiple hazards / threats, multiple physical, social, economic, institutional and attitudinal vulnerabilities
and exposure and consequent potential impact on heritage attributes and the associated values,
people’s safety, economy and livelihoods and on the social structure. Various components of disaster risk
management plan of cultural heritage before, during after disaster would include prevention, mitigation,
climate change adaptation and preparedness measures, emergency response procedures, and recovery
process. However investing in disaster risk reduction through mitigation, adaptation and preparedness
makes much more economic sense than investing heavily on response and recovery as previous
experience in Nepal, Myanmar and Italy have aptly demonstrated. Going by the widely accepted principle

i UNISDR, . Links between disaster risk reduction, development and climate change. (Geneva:2008)

of ‘Building Back Better’, the recovery process should incorporate mitigation of risks for future disasters.
In order to undertake effective measures for disaster risk reduction, there needs to be greater cooperation
between agencies and professionals from heritage and disaster management fields. For emergency
response, heritage professionals and agencies should work closely with civic defense organizations
such as fire office, police and humanitarian sector at large. Moreover DRM for cultural heritage should
be integrated into various development sectors such as sanitation, water supply, housing, environment,
infrastructure and services. This would also require capacity building initiatives at various levels.
However, in order to achieve effective results, close engagement with all sections of the local
communities including those who are marginalized is crucial as they can effectively assist as volunteers
during emergency situations. Local Nongovernmental Organisations (NGOs) can also play very importantrole in bridging the gap between government and local communities. This would necessitate effective
awareness raising programmes to sensitise community members on impending risks to lives and heritage
and the significant role communities can play as volunteers in reducing risks as well as responding todisasters. Media can play a crucial role in achieving this.
In response to the above mentioned challenges, the Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban
Cultural Heritage at Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan in close technical cooperation with theInternational Centre from the Study of Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM), anintergovernmental organization headquartered in Rome, Italy and with additional support from ICOMOSICORP, ICOM and Agency for Cultural Affairs of Japan has been spearheading capacity building in thearea of disaster risk management of cultural heritage following the recommendations of the UN World
Conference on Disaster Reduction in January 2005 as part of the UNESCO Chair Programme on Cultural
Heritage and Risk Management; one of the unique programmes on this theme in the world. The target
groups for this course include government institutions, departments, universities, NGOs and private
consultants from cultural heritage, as well as relevant disaster management fields. The three-week course
is based on lectures by eminent experts, field visits, exercises and discussions. Nearly 164 professionals
from more than 60 countries have been trained through this annual course that is held in Kyoto and otherhistoric sites in Japan such as Minamisanriku Cho (East Japan), Nara, Himeji, Kobe, Sasayama and Takeda .
The 14th International Training Course (ITC) on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage once
again focused on an integrated disaster risk management of movable and immovable heritage. This isincreasingly being recognized as an important area since during disasters, museum collections, manyof which are housed in historic buildings and artefacts of social and religious values located in living
heritage buildings and sites have suffered enormous damages. This requires integrated approaches
for risk assessment and management that consider the values, vulnerability and capacity of both
movable and immovable heritage. Moreover there needs to be greater collaboration between heritage
professionals and organization from the fields of collections and sites management. Lectures, classroom
exercises and discussions, as well as field visits to various heritage sites in Takeda castle, Hirafuku town
and Kobe facilitated the learning process. Moreover the participants prepared outline of the disaster risk
management plans for case study sites from their home countries based on the outlines prepared by themduring the course The proceeding of the 14th ITC contains papers based on these case study projects.
The importance of this training course has been globally recognized as seen with increasing number ofapplicants from all over the world. 280 applications from more than 60 countries were received for ITC
2019. The institute hopes to continue this initiative in the future in close cooperation with ICCROM.
Rohit JIGYASU
Project Manager,
International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property(ICCROM)

Table of Contents
Preface3

1.

9Introduction

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019 10
1.2 Timetable of International Trainig Course (ITC) on
Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage 2019, 14th year,
Ritsumeikan University

2.

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects

36

by ITC 2019 Participants

39

by Virginia Fernanda GONZÁLEZ, from Argentina

40

2.1 Proposal for Mitigation and Preparedness Measures, Argentina,
2.2 Tor di Quinto Riverside, Rome, Italy, by Angela Maria MICELI, from Italy

44

2.3 Disaster risk management plan for heritage sites:
A proposal for MuNDA, Museo Nazionale D’Abruzzo, L’Aquila, Italy,
by Monia DEL PINTO, from Italy50

2.4 Disaster Risk Management in the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization,
Egypt, by Mahrous Eid Moustafa ELSANADIDY, from Egypt

57

2.5 Disaster risk management plan for Los Amantes de Sumpa(The Lovers of Sumpa) archeological site and museum, Ecuador
by Enrique RODRIGUEZ LEON, from Ecuador

67

2.6 Disaster Risk Reduction for the Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape, South Africa,
by Clinton JACKSON, from South Africa
2.7 The Historic Centre of Napoli, Italy, by Roy GIAMPORCARO, from Italy

73
79

2.8 Integrated DRM plan for People and Cultural Heritage needs for Mole
Vanvitelliana in Ancona, Italy, by Alessia STROZZI, from Italy

86

2.9 Wamala Tombs, Uganda,
by Samson Lukabya NABBIMBA (OMUTAKA NAKIGOYE), from Uganda

89

2.10 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan for Persian Qanats of Baravat,
Iran, by Ameneh KARIMIAN, from Iran94

2.11 DRM Plan for the Buddhist Vihara at Paharpur,Bangladesh,by Shah Zahidur RAHMAN, from Bangladesh

99

2.12 Development of Disaster Risk Management plan for
Geological Museum, Armenia, by Lilit GEVORGYAN, from Armenia
3.

Activities Undertaken after the International Training Course

3.1

Implementation of Disaster Risk Management on Cultural Heritage forby Former Participants

104

111

George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site, Malaysia
by Ming Chee ANG, from Malaysia

Appendix

List of Resource Persons

112

123
124

List of Participants

127

Photos of ITC 2019128

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and Objectives of
the 14th International Training Course 2019

Disasters and Cultural Heritage
Recent disasters such as fires in the Notre-Dame de Paris in 2019 and National Museum of Brazil in 2018,
earthquakes in Central Mexico in 2017, Myanmar and Italy in 2016, Nepal in April and May 2015, Haiti andChile in 2010, earthquake and cyclones in Philippines in 2014, fires in Lijiang, China in 2013 and 2014,
the devastating tsunami in North East of Japan in 2011 have caused enormous loss of life, property andcultural heritage, both in its tangible and intangible as well as movable and immovable manifestations.
This disaster has once again shown that cultural heritage, including historic buildings, archaeological sites,
historic cities and cultural landscapes, is highly vulnerable to disasters caused by natural as well as humaninduced hazards such as earthquake, the Tsunami, fire, floods, cyclones/typhoons, armed conflict, theft,
and terrorism. These may also cause secondary hazards such as the Tsunami, landslides, and fires thereby
exacerbating the damage to cultural heritage. Climate Change is further causing increase in the frequency
and intensity of hydro-meteorological hazards such as floods and typhoons/cyclones.
Therefore it is important to undertake proactive measures that can reduce risks to cultural heritage fromthese catastrophic events through adequate mitigation and preparedness measures. During emergency
phase, the challenge is how to assess damage and stabilize built heritage properties, which are at riskof demolition as well as salvage movable heritage fragments and collections, and assess their damage.
The long term challenge during recovery phase is how to repair and retrofit them and undertakereconstruction that respects tangible as well as intangible heritage values while reducing vulnerabilities.
In the light of these challenges, comprehensive disaster risk management is essential for the protection ofcultural heritage from disasters. Therefore Cultural Heritage and Risk Management project of Institute ofDisaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH) aims to organize theInternational Training Programme to build the institutional capacity needed to formulate comprehensive
disaster risk management plans that are based on the characteristics of cultural heritage and nature ofhazards to which the region is exposed.

101.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

World Heritage Sites Located in the Earthquake Zones(䖃:Earthquake,(●:Earthquake, 䖃:●: Cultural and Mixed Heritage, 䖃:●: Natural Heritage)
By Research Center for Disaster Mitigation of Urban Cultural Heritage,
Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto Japan, 2008
Fig.1 World Heritage Sites Located in the Earthquake Zones 2008
Table 1 Regional Distribution of World Heritage sites located on the Earthquake Zones

Region100-200 km

100

91
1
3
10

2
10
2
2
10

1

1
11
1
1
1
4

3
1
1
8
6

16
1

6
35

8
23

13

8
2
18
109

36
136

Within
200km
191
1
5
20
2
3
21
1
0
2
1
7
1
1
24
7
0
14
58
0
21
2
54
245

27%
14%
45%
59%
22%
14%
42%
2%
0%
100%
100%
21%
7%
2%
57%
39%
0%
29%
45%
0%
40%
2%
31%
28%

Over 200km
513
6
6
14
7
18
29
56
14

27
13
49
18
11
7
34
70
16
31
87
120
633

73%
86%
55%
41%
78%
86%
58%
98%
100%
0%
0%
79%
93%
98%
43%
61%
100%
71%
55%
100%
60%
98%
69%
72%

Total
704
7
11
34
9
21
50
57
14
2
1
34
14
50
42
18
7
48
128
16
52
89
174
878

Introduction

Cultural/Mix
Australia/New Zealand
Caribbean
Central America
Central Asia
Eastern Africa
Eastern Asia
Eastern Europe
European Russia
Melanesia
Middle Africa
Northern Africa
Northern America
Northern Europe
South America
Southeastern Asia
Sothern Africa
Southern Asia
Southern Europe
Western Africa
Western Asia
Western Europe
NaturalTotal

0-100 km11

Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage,
Ritsumeikan University and Its Training Course

The International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage is a follow-up of therecommendations adopted at the Special Thematic Session on Risk Management for Cultural Heritage
held at UN-WCDR (World Conference on Disaster Reduction) in January 2005 in Kobe, Hyogo, Japan.
One of these recommendations advocated the need for the academic community to develop scientificresearch, education and training programs incorporating cultural heritage in both its tangible andintangible manifestations, into disaster risk management. The importance of strengthening knowledge,
innovation and education to build a culture of disaster prevention at WH properties was reiterated also by
the World Heritage Committee at its 30th session (Vilnius, Lithuania, July 2006).
Furthermore, the “Declaration”, adopted at the International Disaster Reduction Conference (IDRC) of
Davos (August 2006) confirmed that “concern for heritage, both tangible and intangible, should beincorporated into disaster risk reduction strategies and plans, which are strengthened through attention
to cultural attributes and traditional knowledge”. The Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction
recently adopted at the World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai, Japan has further
highlighted the importance of protecting cultural heritage from disasters. Cultural heritage has also been
included one of the sectors in the new ten essentials that have been adopted by UNISDR’s resilient city
campaign.
In response to these recommendations by the international community, the Institute of Disaster
Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage at Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH) has been acting as a focal
point for organizing international research, training and information network in the field of cultural
heritage risk management and disaster mitigation. Besides R-DMUCH also functioned as the internationalsecretariat for ICOMOS-International Scientific Committee on Risk Preparedness (ICORP) from 2011 to2014 and many resource persons of the course are expert members of the Scientific Committee.
164 participants in total from 63 countries have participated in our training courses till date. These
participants are from East Asia (Indonesia, South Korea, China, Philippines, Malaysia, Myanmar, Vietnam,
Thailand and Laos), South Asia (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka and Maldives),
Oceania (Palau, Fiji, New Zealand and Australia), Central and South America (Argentina, Costa Rica, Peru,
Chile, Jamaica, Haiti, Colombia, Mexico, Ecuador, Honduras, Brazil and Panama), Europe (Armenia, Serbia,
Moldova, Italy, Albania, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Spain, Netherlands, Romania, France, Georgia
and Belgium), Middle East (Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Afghanistan, Syria, Palestine, and Jordan), Africa (South Africa,
Ghana, Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria, Tanzania, Egypt, Morocco, Malawi, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe).

12

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

Objectives and Methodology of the Training Course
The main objective of the course is to provide theoretical and practical knowledge on various aspects ofdisaster risk management of cultural heritage. In particular, the course provides interdisciplinary training to:✓Undertake an integrated risk assessment of tangible and intangible, immovable and movablecultural heritage by analyzing their vulnerability to natural and human induced hazards thatcan cause disasters;✓

Build integrated system for disaster risk management of cultural heritage, incorporating
various measures aimed at reducing risks, responding to disasters and recovering from them.

✓

Formulate disaster risk management plans for cultural heritage that correspond to the local/
urban, national and regional plans and policies for disaster risk management anddevelopment as well as humanitarian response and recovery mechanisms;✓

To learn practical tools, methodologies and skills for disaster risk management of cultural
heritage such as cost benefit analysis, value assessment, budgeting and communication
methods with various stakeholders ranging from the decision makers to local communities;
and✓Strengthen the international scientific support network in order to build the institutional
capacity needed to formulate comprehensive disaster risk management plans that are basedon the characteristics of cultural heritage and nature of hazards in the national and regional
Introduction

context.
The course comprises lectures, site visits, workshops, discussions, team projects and individual/grouppresentations. Participants are expected to actively participate throughout the course. The course aims at
promoting the development of collaborations and network building among scholars and professionals in
cultural heritage protection. This course is provided scientific support by UNESCO and the International
Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM).

Fig.2 14th International Trainig Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage 201913

Based on the knowledge obtained from lectures, site visits, and exercises through interactive workshops,
the training course also sets the goal of raising planning skills in disaster risk management of cultural
heritage, by having each participant formulate outline of a DRM plan of a case study site or museumfrom the participant’s home country in line with the country’s respective social, economic andinstitutional context. In order to do so, the Institute asked the selected participants to collect relevant
data/information related to the cultural heritage, hazard characteristics and local context before coming
to Japan.

Sub Theme of 2019 International Training Programme:

Towards Integrated Protection of Immovable and Movable Cultural Heritage
from Disasters

Disasters not only effect the immovable heritage components such as monuments, archaeological sites
and historic urban areas but also cause damage to the movable components that include museum
collections and heritage objects that are in active use such as religious and other artefacts of significanceto the local community. Both these movable and immovable components are exposed to various
natural and human induced hazards that necessitate appropriate measures to reduce disaster risks. Alsoin the aftermath of a disaster many architectural fragments of damaged or collapsed buildings needdocumentation, handling and storage similar to movable heritage collections. Therefore an integrated
approach for movable and immovable heritage is needed for risk assessment of heritage sites as well as
museums and its collections before, during and after a disaster situation. Limited availability of humanand financial resources also calls for closer coordination between professionals and institutions dealing
with heritage sites, museums and the external agencies. Moreover integrated disaster risk management
involves appropriate mitigation and adaptation strategies to reduce various risks to movable andimmovable heritage components by taking into consideration their heritage values that are often
interdependent. It is also important to recognize many examples of traditional knowledge evolved bycommunities through series of trials and errors that demonstrate that movable and immovable cultural
heritage can be an effective source of resilience against disaster risks and integrate these in larger
disaster risk management strategies and policies. Considering these aspects, the 14th International
Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage will specifically focus on “Integrated
Protection of Immovable and Movable Cultural Heritage from Disasters”.
Japan is home to a variety of frequently occurring disasters, which can cause wide-ranging damage
to its cultural resources. For this reason, the country has taken specialized measures in establishing adisaster risk management system and methodology for post-disaster emergency response and recovery.
Various cultural heritage disaster mitigation measures, many developed in response to Japan's special
circumstances, will be shared in this training.

141.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

Earthquake struck Central Italy on 26th August, 2016 causing extensive damage to historic settlements in theregionIntroduction

Earthquake struck Central Italy on 26th August, 2016 causing extensive damage to historic settlements in theregion15

The buildings related to Hanuman Dhoka Palace Museum damaged in the 2015 earthquake, Kathmandu, Nepal

16

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

Previous International Training Courses (2006-2018)
ITC 2006

In 2006, which was the first year for this course, eight participants from four countries were invited;
namely India and Pakistan, which were struck by a great earthquake in 2005 in Kashmir; Indonesia, whichsuffered the Indian Ocean Tsunami triggered by the Sumatra Earthquake in 2004 and the Earthquake on
the Javanese Island in 2004; and Korea, which had suffered a big forest fire.
ITC 2007

In 2007, R-DMUCH exchanged MOU with ICCROM and established a criterion for choosing participants
with the support of ICCROM. As a result, eight trainees from Bangladesh, China, Peru and Philippines wereinvited for the training course.
Based on the experience of 2006 training course, it was decided to make closer relation between thelectures, site visits and workshops. Therefore in 2007, several related sets of lectures were held in themornings and workshops in the afternoons. Based on these, discussions were facilitated by the instructors
so that the trainees were able to reflect more effectively on the challenges for cultural heritage disastermanagement within their own context.
ITC 2008

The 2008 training course actively built upon the rich experience gathered during the courses held in the
Introduction

previous two years. This year had participants from five countries from Asia and Europe, namely Nepal,
Bhutan, Iran, Serbia and Chinese Taipei. Effort was made to make this year’s course, more field-based bydrawing upon the unique opportunity offered by the location of important World Heritage Sites in Kyoto
such as Kiyomizu-dera and Ninna-ji temples. Most of the workshops were, therefore, based on field work
undertaken by the participants in these sites. This year’s course also put greater emphasis on exposing theparticipants to the methodology for undertaking disaster risk assessment for cultural heritage sites.
ITC 2009

The 2009 training course further evolved on the basis of rich feedback provided by the participants ofthe training courses from previous years. In response to the need for making the course more relevant tospecific requirements and constraints of the developing countries, it was decided to organize the course
partly in Japan and partly in Nepal.
Moreover, for the first time, the training course had a specific theme, namely “Earthquake risk

management of Historic Urban Areas”. For this purpose, Kyoto and Kathmandu; two historic cities withrich cultural heritage but extremely vulnerable to earthquakes, were chosen as the case study sites forundertaking field exercises during the training course.
The first week of the course was organized in Japan and it focused on familiarizing the participants
with the basic methodology for risk assessment and management for cultural heritage properties. The
participants were shown various disaster prevention facilities developed for numerous cultural heritage
sites in Kyoto. Second week in Kathmandu focused on the earthquake vulnerability and capacity of the17World Heritage Monument Zone of Patan and its surrounding historic urban area, both at building andarea levels.
The UNESCO Chair programme intends to build upon the four years of very rich experience gained
through very active participation of lecturers from Japan and abroad, as well as the international
participants from various countries from Asia, Europe and the Caribbean and further enrich the contentsof the training course in subsequent years.
ITC 2010

Fifth UNESCO Chair International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage 2010
was held from 13 to 26 September 2010 in Kyoto, Kobe and Sasayama, Japan. In the light of destructive
Haiti earthquake on January 2010, this fifth International Training Course especially focused on emergency

response and long term recovery of wooden and masonry composite Cultural Heritage from disasters.
It was attended by 11 participants from 5 countries; Bhutan, Palau, Peru, Serbia, and Turkey.

On the final day of the course, the international symposium titled “How to protect Cultural Heritage from
Disaster; Risk Preparedness and Post Disaster Recovery” was organized by Ritsumeikan University and theICOMOS International Committee on Risk Preparedness (ICORP). In the symposium, the current challenges
for protection of cultural heritages taking into account the context of post disaster recovery was discussed
in great depth with international experts from UNESCO, ICOMOS, ICORP and a representative of Kyo-oGokoku-ji Temple; World Cultural Heritage site in Kyoto.
ITC 2011

Sixth UNESCO Chair International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage
was held from 10 to 24 September 2011 in Kyoto, Kobe, and Tohoku area of East Japan. In the light ofincreasing vulnerability of rapidly urbanizing settlements, the course focused on “Integrated Approachfor Disaster Risk Mitigation of Historic Cities”. The course was attended by 11 participants from 8
countries; Columbia, Jamaica, Kenya, Uganda, China, Mexico, India and Bangladesh.
ITC 2012

Seventh International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage held during
September 2012 in Kyoto, Kobe, and Tohoku area of East Japan focused on sustainable recovery of cultural

heritage. Accordingly the theme of the course was “From Recovery to Risk Reduction for Sustainabilityof Historic Areas”.
ITC 2013

The theme of the 8th UNESCO Chair International Training Course on Disaster Risk Management ofCultural Heritage was “Reducing Disaster Risks to Historic Urban Areas and Their Territorial Settings

through Mitigation”. The course focused on policies and planning measures for mitigating risks to cultural
heritage from multiple hazards such as earthquakes, floods, landslides, and fires, especially in rapidly

urbanizing context of developing countries. Special techniques for mitigating risks from earthquakes andfires were also highlighted besides policies, planning and design interventions for long term restoration18

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019and rehabilitation of cultural heritage following disaster through a special workshop in the area affectedby the Great East Japan Disaster in 2011.

ITC 2014

One of the main reasons for extensive damage to cultural heritage is due to fires resulting from natural(bush/forest fires) or human induced causes (arson, chemical or bomb explosion, poor electric wiringor during renovation works). Also fires can result from earthquakes as was the case during 1995 Great
Hanshin Awaji earthquake in Japan. Considering these issues, the 9th UNESCO Chair International Training
Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage focused on “Protecting living cultural heritage

from disaster risks due to fire”. Policies and planning measures for reducing fire risks to cultural heritage

especially in rapidly urbanizing context of developing countries, special techniques for fire prevention andmitigation, emergency response as well as interventions for long term restoration and rehabilitation ofcultural heritage following disaster were discussed during 2014 course.
ITC 2015

Earthquakes and floods cause immense damage to cultural heritage. Recently devastating earthquakes
in Nepal in 2015, 2013 earthquake in Philippines, North Italy earthquake of 2012 caused vast damage
to cultural heritage. Moreover 2014 floods in Balkan region, 2011 floods in Thailand and 2010 floods
Introductionin Pakistan also caused damage to historic towns and archaeological sites such as Ayutthaya. Whilevulnerability of cultural heritage to earthquake and floods is increasing more than ever before, there
are many examples of traditional knowledge systems developed by communities for mitigating against
earthquakes and floods. Considering these issues and challenges the 10th International Training Course
focused on the protection of cultural heritage from earthquakes, floods, and other associated hazards.
ITC 2016

Climate change is increasing the frequency of disasters caused by hydro-meteorological events such as
heavy rainfall, flash floods, cyclones, typhoons, and storm surges. As a result, many heritage sites locatedin global hot spots such as coastal areas especially below sea level are exposed to risks of inundation
greater than ever before. Also, there might be low frequency high intensity incidents of flooding that maytrigger landslides along mountain slopes. Moreover, climate change is resulting in higher temperatures
are also resulting increased incidents of wild fires putting cultural heritage located in forested areas togreater risk than ever before. The 11th International Training Course specially focused on the protecting
cultural heritage from risks of natural disasters including those induced by climate change.
ITC 2017-2018

The course focused on the integrated approach for movable and immovable heritage for disasterrisk management of heritage sites as well as museums and its collections before, during, and after adisaster situation.

19

Organizers and Participants

The training course is organized from the cooperation with the UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOM, ICOMOS/ICORP, and relevant institutions of the government of Japan.

Participants List of the Previous Training Courses
ITC 2006, the 1st year
No

1

2

3

Poonacha
KODIRA

Anup KARANTH

SektiadiCountryWork Position and Affiliation

INDIA

Director (Conservation),
Ministry of Tourism andCulture Archaeological Surveyof India

INDIA

Project Coordinator,
Urban Earthquake Vulnerability
Reduction Project, United
Nations Development
Programme (UNDP) India

INDONSESIA

Lecturer,
Dept. of Archaeology, Facultyof Culture Sciences, Gadjah
Mada University

4

Manggar AYUATIINDONESIA

Supervisor of Rescue
on Preservation Division,
Dept. of Cultural and Tourism,
Center for Preservation ofCultural Heritage of Yogyakarta
Province5

Fauzia QURESHIPAKISTAN

Head of the Departmentof Architecture,
National College of Arts, Lahore

PAKISTAN

Coordinator,
Disaster Management Desk
RDPI,
Rural Development Policy
Institute

KOREA

Government employeeof Modern Construction Field,
Tangible Cultural Heritage
Bureau,Cultural Heritage
Administration,
Republic of Korea

6

7

8

20

Name

Hussain KHADIM

Seok JEONG

Woongju SHIN

KOREA

Concurrent Professor,
Dept. Interior Architecture,
Chosun College of Science andTechnology

DRM Plans of Cultural Heritage
Formulated by the Participants

Qutb Minar and its
Monuments, Delhi, WHS

Prambanan Temple
Compounds, WHS and its
Surrounding Environment

Rohtas Fort, WHS

Historic Villages of Korea:
Hahoe, WHS in Andong City

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

ITC 2007, the 2nd year
No

Name

CountryWork Position and Affiliation

1

A.K.M. Monowar
Hossain
AKHANDBANGLADESH

Deputy Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs, GOVT.
of Bangladesh

2

Md. Rafiqul
ALAM

BANGLADESH

Executive Director,
DWIP UNNAYAN SONGTHA (DUS)

P. R. CHINA

Protection and Management
Bureau of World Cultural
Heritage Site - the Old Town of
Lijiang3

Shijun HE

Cuiyu HEP. R. CHINA

Protection and Management
Bureau of World Cultural Heritage
Site - the Old Town of Lijiang

5Maria Del
CarmenCORRALES PEREZPERUInstituto Nacional De Cultura
Architect of the conservation
and Restoration Sub Direction

PERU

Chief of Laboratory of Structures,Japan-Peru Center for
Earthquake Engineering
Research and Disaster Mitigation

6

Partricia Isabel
GIBU YAGUE

7

Glen
CONCEPCIONPHILIPPINES

City Disaster Action Officer andCity Environment & Natural
Resources Officer,
City Government of Vigan

8

Eric QUADRA

PHILIPPINES

Architect, LGU-Vigan City

Lal Bagh Fort, Dhaka,Bangladesh

Old Town of Lijiang , WHS

Historic Centre of Lima, WHS

Introduction

4

DRM Plans of Cultural Heritage
Formulated by the ParticipantsHistoric Town of Vigan, WHS

21

ITC 2008, the 3rd year
Name

No

1

Choening DORJI

CountryWork Position and Affiliation
Architect,
Division for Conservation of
Heritage Sites, Department
of Culture, Ministry of Home
& Cultural Affairs Royal
Government of Bhutan

BHUTANDRM Plans of Cultural Heritage
Formulated by the Participants

Tashichho Dzong

BHUTAN

Civil Engineer,
Tashichhodzong Maintenance
Division, Dzongkhag
Administration

IRAN

Deputy of Research & TechnicalConsultant,
Recovery Project of Bam’s
Cultural Heritage

Bam and its CulturalLandscape, WHS

4

Fatemeh
MEHDIZADEHSARADJ

IRAN

Assistant Professor,
Department of Conservation,
Iran University of Science andTechnology

Bam and its CulturalLandscape, WHS

5Kai Ube Prasad
WEISE

NEPAL

Architect, Planners’ Alliancefor the Himalayan & Allied
Regions

6

Suman Narsingh
RAJBHANDARI

NEPALAssistant Professor, Nepal
Engineering College

7

Ivana FILIPOVICSERBIA

Architect Conservationist,
Cultural Heritage Preservation
Institute of Belgrade2

Karma TENZIN

3

Mahmoud
NEJATI

Patan Durbar Square
Monument Zone in
Kathmandu Valley, WHS

Lower Town in Belgrade
Fortress

Observers
Name

No

CountryWork Position and Affiliation

1

Shang Chia
CHIOU

TAIWAN

Professor, Department of Architecture and Interior
Design, National Yunlin University of Science &Technology

2

Shen Wen CHIENTAIWAN

Associate Professor, Department of Fire Science, Central
Police University

ITC 2009, the 4th year
No

1

22

Name

Rong YUCountryWork Position and Affiliation

P. R. CHINA

Lecturer, Wenhua College,
Huazhong University of Scienceand Technology

DRM Plans of Cultural

Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

Dujiangyan, WHS

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

P.R.CHINA

Researcher, Tongji University,
National Historic Cities ResearchCenterDujiangyan, WHSNEPALArchitect, World Heritage
Conservation Section/Ministry of
Culture and State Restructuring,
Department of Archaeology

Patan Durbar Square
Monument Zone in
Kathmandu Valley, WHS

4Suresh Suras
SHRESTHA

NEPAL

Archaeological Officer,
Ministry of Culture and state
Restructuring, Department ofArchaeology

Patan Durbar Square
Monument Zone in
Kathmandu Valley, WHS

5Pauline BROWNJAMAICA

Senior Director, Office of Disaster
Preparedness and Emergency
Management

2

Yuan DING

3

Ramesh
THAPALIYA

Audene BROOKSJAMAICA

7

Sergius
CIOCANU

MOLDOVA

Head Scientific Researcher,
Institute of Cultural Heritage of the
Academy of Science of Moldova

8

Valeria
SURUCEANU

MOLDOVA

Curator,National art Museum ofMoldova

Port Royal City

National Museum ofFine Arts (Buildings andCollection)
Introduction

6

Senior Archaeologist, Jamaica
National Heritage Trust

Observers in the Kathmandu Part of the ITC 2009
Name

No

CountryWork Position and Affiliation1

Keshab P. SHRESTHA

NEPAL

Chief, National History Museum

2

Punya Sagar MARAHATTA

NEPALLecturer, IoE, tribhuvan University

3

Ajay LAL CHANDRA

NEPAL

Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture and
Urban Planning, IoE

4

Gyanin RAI

NEPAL

Chief (Administration, Information & Public Relation
Section), Lumbini Development Trust

5

Inu PRADHAN SALIKE

NEPAL

Lecturer, Khwopa Engineering College

6

Saubhagya PRADHNANGANEPALHead of Culture and Archaeology Unit, Lalitpur Sub
Metropolitan City Office7

Chandra Shova SHAKYANEPALHead of Heritage Section, Lalitpur Sub Metropolitan
City Office8

Prabin SHRESTHANEPALHead of Urban Development Division, Lalitpur Sub
Metropolitan City Office

9

Ashok SHRESTHANEPALHead of Administration Division, Lalitpur Sub
Metropolitan City Office10

Sainik Raj SINGHNEPALHead of Earthquake Safety Section, Lalitpur Sub
Metropolitan City Office23

ITC 2010, the 5th year
No

1

24

Name

DechenTSHERINGCountryWork Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural Heritage

Formulated by the Participants

BHUTAN

Structural Engineer, Division
for Conservation of Heritage Sites,
Department of Culture, Ministryof Home & Cultural Affairs, Royal
Government of Bhutan

BHUTAN

Deputy Chief Conservation
Architect, Division for Conservation of
Heritage Sites, Department of Culture,
Ministry of Home and Cultural Affairs,
Royal Government of Bhutan

Bai: Traditional Meeting
House

Wangduephodrang Dzong

2

Junko MUKAI

3

Alexander G
DWIGHT

PALAU

Director, Historical Preservation
Officer,
Bureau of Arts & Culture, Ministry ofCommunity & Cultural Affairs

4

Sunny
NGIRMANG

PALAU

Palau National Registrar,
Bureau of Arts & Culture, Palau
Historic Preservation Office

Bai: Traditional Meeting
House

5

TeresaVILCAPOMAHUAPAYAPERU

Professor, Sagrado Corazon
University

City of Cuzco, WHS

6Olga Keiko
MENDOZASHIMADAPERUJSPS Research Fellow, Graduate
School of Science & Engineering,
Ritsumeikan University

City of Cuzco, WHS

7

Marilene
TERRONES DIAZ

PERU

Professor, Sagrado Corazon
University

City of Cuzco, WHS

8

MilicaGROZDANICSERBIA

Director,
Cultural Heritage Preservation
Institute of Belgrade

Kosancicev Venac, Belgrade

9

Svetlana
Dimitrijevic
MARKOVICSERBIA

Architect - Conservator - Senior
Associate,
Cultural Heritage Preservation
Institute of Belgrade

Kosancicev Venac, Belgrade

10

Zeynep
GUL UNAL

TURKEY

Assistant Professor, Dr.
Yildiz Technical University, Facultyof Architecture, Restoration
Department

Eskigediz Heritage Site

11

MeltemVATAN KAPTANTURKEY

Research Assistant, PhD Student,
Yildiz Technical University, Facultyof Architecture, Structural Systems
Division

Eskigediz Heritage Site

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

ITC 2011, the 6th year
Work Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural Heritage

Name

Country

1

Celina RINCON

COLOMBIA

Assessor for the Heritage
Director Office,Ministry of Culture

History center of Santa Cruzde Mompox, WHS

2Cheryl NICHOLSJAMAICA

Training Manager,
Office of Disaster Preparedness
and Emergency Management

The Holy Trinity Cathedral

3

Jose Ramon
PEREZ OCEJOMEXICO

Part-time Teacher,
Universidad de las Américas(Puebla, MEXICO)Colonial City Centre of Puebla,
WHS

4

Julius
MWAHUNGA

KENYA

Senior Cultural Officer,
Ministry of State for National
Heritage and Culture,
Department of Culture

Lamu Old Town, WHS

5

Remigius
KIGONGOUGANDA

Conservator Sites andMonuments/ Site Manager,
Department of Museums andMonuments

Kasubi Tombs, WHS

Taj Mahal, WHS

No

Formulated by the Participants

Janhwij SHARMA

INDIA

7

Md. Aamir
Hussain SHIKDERBANGLADESH

Urban Local Body Coordinator,
Bangladesh Municipal
Development Fund (BMDF)

Historic Mosque City ofBagerhat, WHS

8Qing WEI

P. R. CHINA

Deputy Director,
Cultural Heritage Conservation
Center, THAD

Kulangsu

P. R. CHINAPhD Candidate,
Urban Design and Planning
Department, Norwegian
University of Science andTechnology (NTNU)

Taoping Qiang Village

9

Yu WANG

Introduction

6

Director (Conservation andWorld Heritage),
Archaeological Survey of India,
Ministry of Culture

25

ITC 2012, the 7th year
No

Name

1

Suzie YEE SHOW

2

Vikas LAKHANICountryWork Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural Heritage

Formulated by the Participants

FIJI

Secretary General,
ICOMOS PASIFIKA

Levuka Town, WHS

INDIA

Sector Manager,
Gujarat State Disaster
Management Authority

Champaner - Pavagadh
Archaeological Park,
Panchamahal District, Gujarat,
WHS

Jongmyo Shrine, WHS

3Sang sun JO

KOREA

Research Associate andCurator,Heritage Repair Division,
Cultural Heritage
Administration of KOREA

4

Rosli
BIN HAJI NOR

MALAYSIA

Head of Melaka World Heritage
Office,Melaka World Heritage Office

Historic City of Melaka, WHS

Bagan located in Manadalay
Division, Myanmar

5

Ni LEI WIN

MYANMAR

Communications Officer at
World Concern Myanmar,
Relief, Recovery andDevelopment Project inMyanma6

Helen
McCRACKENNEWZEALAND

Policy Adviser - Heritage,
Ministry for Culture andHeritage

Cuba Street Historic Area,
Wellington

7

Usman SHAMIMPAKISTAN

Programme Officer,
Kuchlak Welfare Society (KWS)

Mehrgarh, lies on the "Kachi
plain" of now Balochistan,
Pakistan

8

PoornaYAHAMPATHSRI LANKA

Consultant- External Resource Person,
Disaster Risk Management &Climate Change for GIZ

Sacred City of Kandy,
Sri Lanka, WHS

9

Sibel
YILDIRIM ESEN

TURKEYConservation Architect,
Ministry of Culture andTourism

Agora Archeological Sitein the Historic City of Izmir

Observers

26

No

Name

CountryWork Position and Affiliation

1

Dong Seok KANG

KOREA

A Section Chief of GIS, Cultural Heritage Administration

2

Thi My Thi TONGVIET NAM

PhD Student, International Environmental and Disaster
Management Laboratory, Graduate School of Global
Environmental Studies, Kyoto University

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

ITC 2013, the 8th year
No

Name

1

Saleh
MohammadSAMIT

2Dian LAKSHMIPRATIWICountryWork Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural Heritage

Formulated by the Participants

AFGHANISTANNational Manager,
Community Development
Programme, Aga Khan
Foundation- Afghanistan

Cultural Landscape andArchaeological Remains of
the Bamiyan Valley, WHS

INDONESIAHead of Archaeological
Section,Division of History,
Archaeological and Museum,
Cultural Service Office,
Government of Yogyakarta
Special Territory

Kotagede Heritage Area,
Yogyakarta Historic City

Golestan Palace, Tehran
Bazaar and their surrounding
old urban fabrics, Tehran

Kambod AMINIHOSSEINI

IRAN

4

BarbaraCARANZAITALY

MEC srl
Italian Army “LIGURIA” ARMYMILITARY COMMAND

Monumental Cemetery of
Staglieno, Genoa
Portovenere, Cinque
Terre, and the lslands(Palmaria,Tino and Tinetto),
WHS

5

Paola MUSSINIITALY

Researcher,
SiTI-Instituto Superioresui Sistemi Territoriali perl’Innovazione

6

Zaha AHMED

MALDIVES

Assistant Architect,
Heritage Department,
Male' Republic of Maldives

Laamu atoll Isdhoo Old
Friday mosque in Maldives

NEPAL

Advisor,
Urban Planning andInfrastructure Development,
GFA Consulting Group (Nepal
Office), on behalf of GIZ/Nepal
Municipal Support
Team, Ministry of Urban
Development, Department
of Urban Development andBuilding Construction

The city core area of Tansen
Municipality

NIGERIA

Director of Programs,
Development Education and
Advocacy
Resources Initiative for Africa(DEAR Africa)

Sukur Cultural Landscape,WHS

7Arjun KOIRALA

8

Kenechukwu
Chudi
ONUKWUBE

Introduction

3

Director,
Risk Management ResearchCenter(Associate Professor)
Risk Management ResearchCenter,International Institute ofEarthquake Engineering andSeismology

27

9

10

MuhammadJuma
MUHAMMAD

Hatthaya

SIRIPHATTHANAKUNTANZANIA

Director,
Urban and Rural Planning
Department of Urban and
Rural Planning

Stone Town of Zanzibar,
WHS

THAILAND

Landscape Architect
Ministry of Culture, Fine Arts
Department,
Office of Architecture

Historic City of Ayutthaya,
WHSCountryWork Position and Affiliation

ITC 2014, the 9th year
No

28

Name

DRM Plans of Cultural Heritage

Formulated by the Participants

1

Elena MAMANIALBANIA

Project Manager, Deputy Headof Office, Cultural Heritage
without Borders (CHwB)

Gjirokastra, WHS

2Catherine
FORBES

AUSTRALIA

Built Heritage Advisor, GML
Heritage; Australia Institute ofArchitects, Australia ICOMOS

The Rocks Historic Urban
Precinct3

Sasa TKALEC

CROATIA

Head of Office of Director,
Croatian Conservation InstituteCastle Batthany in Ludbreg

4

Juan Diego
BADILLO REYESECUADOR

Architect Conservator
freelance, Volunteer SouthAmerica Coordinator

San Antonio del Cerro Ricode Zaruma

Bab El-Wazir, El-Darb AlAhmar District, Historic Cairo,
WHS

5

Abdelhamid
SAYED

EGYPT

Chairman, Conservator in
the Ministry of Antiquities,
Egyptian Heritage Rescue
Foundation (EHRF); Training& Capacity Building UnitManager, Egyptian Earth
Construction Association(EECA)

6

Anaseini
KALOUGATA

THE FIJI
ISLANDS

Senior Project Officer Levuka,
Department of National
Heritage, Culture and Arts

Historical Port Town of
Levuka, WHS

7

Cinthia
CABALLEROHONDURAS

Urban control and planification
unit, Alcaldia Municipal Del
Distrito Central (Gerencia Del
Centro Historico)Central District Historic Area

8

Jyoti PANDEYSHARMA

INDIA

Professor, Department ofArchitecture, Deenbandhu
Chhotu Ram University of
Science & Technology

Fatehpur Sikri, Agra District,
Uttar Pradesh, WHS

9Saut SAGALAINDONESIA

Senior Fellow, Resilience
Development Initiative

Gedung Sate Building,Governor office of West Java
Province

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 201910

Alaa HAMDON

IRAQ

University Lecturer, Researcher
and Earthquake Expert,
Remote Sensing Center, Mosul
University

11

Richard NESTERNEWZEALAND

Technical Advisor – Historic,
Department of Conservation

Government Buildings
Historic Reserve

PAKISTAN

Regional Emergency
Officer (South Punjab),
Punjab Emergency Service(rescue1122), Emergency
Services Academy

Lahore Fort, WHSSYRIAHead of the scientific researchcommissions department,
Higher Commission for
Scientific Research

Crac des Chevaliers(in Arabic: Castle Alhsn), WHS

THAILAND

Captain assistant, Klongtoey
fire station, second operation,
fire department, Bangkok
metropolitan

Vimanmek Palace, WHS

12

13

14

Zafar SHAH

Hussain SALEH

Kaichard
RUTTANAWONGCHAIAl-Hadba Minaret and Nirgal
Gate / Mosul City

Introduction

29

ITC 2015, the 10th year
No

CountryWork Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by
the Participants

CHILE

Assistant professor,
Departamento de Arquitectura,
Universidad Técnica Federico Santa
María

Historic Centre of
Valparaíso

Asante Traditional
Buildings

1

Marcela
HURTADOSALDIAS

2

Benjamin Kofi
AFAGBEGEE

GHANA

Assistant Conservator ofMonuments,
Ghana Museums and Monuments
Board

3

Stephan DONA

HAITI

Disaster Risk Reduction Advisor,
Plan Consult

Citadelle, Sans Souci,
Ramiers

4

Mohamad Faruk
MUSTHAFA

INDIA

Chief Executive Officer,
RAPID RESPONSE

Mahabalipuram

IRAN

Teaching/research assistant in
Department of Environmental
Planning, Ph.D. Candidate inInternational Graduate School:
Heritage Studies,Brandenburg
University of Technology Cottbus

Bam and its CulturallandscapeArchaeological Area ofAgrigento

5

30

Name

Mohammad
RAVANKHAH

6

Aurelio DUGONIITALYRegional Director of ANPAS Sicily
Committee,
National Association for Public
Assistance (ANPAS)

7

HisilaMANANDHAR

NEPAL

Urban planner,
Kathmandu Valley Development
Authority

Patan Durbar Square

8

Sonam LAMA

NEPAL

Assistant professor, Nepal
Enginnering College

Boudhanath Stupa andsurrounding area

9

Ilse Anne
Elisabeth
DE VENTNETHERLANDS

Senior inspector, Geo-Engineering,the Dutch State Supervision of
Mines

Hogeland, Groningen,the Netherlands

10

Bashar Ibrahim
HUSSEINIPALESTINE

Senior Project Architect & Fast Track
Coordinator, Welfare Association –Old City of Jerusalem Revitalization
Program “OCJRP”

Old City of Jerusalem

11

Gerald Vallo
PARAGAS

PHILIPPINES

Urban and Environmental Planner(Licensed),
City Government of Tacloban

The Sto. Niño Shrine andHeritage Museum,and the People’s Centerand Library

12

Marko ALEKSIĆSERBIA

Associate,
Central Institute for Conservation in
Belgrade

Serbian Orthodox
Monastery Žiča

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

SOUTH
AFRICA

Programme Officer,
The African World Heritage Fund(AWHF)

Robben Island

14

WitiyaPITTUNGNAPOOTHAILAND

Lecturer,
Faculty of Architecture,
Naresuan University

Ban Pak Klong Village,
Bangrakham,
Phitsanulok Province,
Thailand15

Ngoc Phu PHAM

VIETNAM

Vice Director, Hoi An center for
Cultural Heritage Management andConservation

Hoi An Ancient Town,
Vietnam

13

Pamela Jane
MAC QUILKAN

Observers
No

Name

1

Satoko TOYODACountry
JAPANWork Position and Affiliation
Student,
Stuttgart State Academy of Art and Design, Germany

ITC 2016, the 11th year
No

Name

2

Fatma Saidi
TWAHIR

3

Muhammad Fathi
Hasan AL-ABSIDRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

BRAZIL

Architect Preservationist,
Rio de Janeiro Municipal
Government / Rio World
Heritage Institute

Carioca Landscapes Between
the Mountain and the Sea

KENYA

Architect, Sites andMonuments; & Mombasa Old
Town Conservation Office,National Museums of Kenya

Mombasa Old Town
Conservation Area

JORDAN

Associate conservator
Architect, Engineering andconservation department/
Department of Antiquities(DOA)

Petra or Karak castle

Zona Arqueológica de
El Tajín, Veracruz (Tajín
Archaeological Site)

4

Dulce MariaGRIMALDI SIERRAMEXICO

Senior conservator forconservation and researchof decorative elements at
archaeological sites,
Coordinación Nacional deConservación del Patrimonio
Cultural (CNCPC),
Instituto Nacional deAntropología e Historia (INAH)

5

Barbara MINGUEZGARCIASPAIN

Consultant, The World Bank

Antigua Guatemala

6

Vanessa Anne
TANNERNEWZEALAND

Senior Heritage Advisor,
Wellington City Council

Newtown Shopping Centre
Heritage Area

Introduction

1

Maria Cristina
Vereza LODI

Work Position and Affiliation

Country

31

BOSNIA AND

Associate for archaeology,
Commission to Preserve
National Monuments of Bosnia
and Herzegovina

Old Bridge Area of the Old
City of Mostar(Part of ) Delta Dunarii,
Romania – Tulcea city andsurroundings proximity

7

Nermina KATKIĆ

8

MihaelaHĂRMĂNESCUROMANIA

Lecturer, PhD Architect,‘Ion Mincu’ University ofArchitecture and Urbanism,
Faculty of Urbanism

9

Alberto Enrique
PASCUAL

PANAMA

Director,
Fundation CoMunidad

Fortifications on the
Caribbean Side of Panama:
Portobelo – San Lorenzo

10

Sherwynne
Bagaoisan AGUB

PHILIPPINES

Legislative Staff Officer IV,
Senate Economic Planningand Policy Office,Senate of the Philippines

Historic Town of Vigan

Volubilis Archaeological Site
(Morocco)

HERZEGOVINA

11

Mohamed ROUAI

MOROCCO

Professor – researcher,
Earth Sciences Department,
Faculty of Sciences,
University Moulay Ismail,Meknes, Morocco.

12Navneet YADAVINDIAAssociate Director,
Disaster Risk Management

Shimla City, Himachal
Pradesh13

Claudia CeciliaGONZÁLEZMUZZIO

CHILE

Partner at Ambito Consultores,
Ambito Consultores Ltda.

Qhapaq Ñan, Andean Road
SystemPAKISTAN

Assistant Director -Recovery &Rehabilitation,
National Disaster Management
Authority,

Mohenjo-Daro archeological
sites

PERU

Senior Auditor – Specialistin Culture Management andCultural Heritage,
Contraloria General de la
Republica

Chan – Chan Archaeological
Zone. (La Libertad, northerncoast of Peru).

14

Amna SHUJA

15Maria ElenaALMESTARURTEAGA

Observers
No

1

32

Name
Sakiko OSHIBACountry
JAPANWork Position and Affiliation
Undergraduate Student,
Toyo Institute of Art and Design1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

ITC 2017, the 12th year
No

Name

Work Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

BhutanConservator,
National Museum of Bhutan

National Museum of Bhutan(Ta Dzong)

Banaue Rice Terraces

Country

Dorji
WANGCHUK

2

Abner Omaging
LAWANGEN

Philippines

Local Disaster Risk Reduction
and Management Officer,
Local Government of Tublay,
Benguet, Philippines

3

Hamit BİRTANE

TurkeyTechnical Expert,
Directorate of Gallipoli
Historical Site

Gallipoli Historical Site

4Innocent Hudson
MANKHWALA

Malawi

Archivist (Conservation
Section),
Department of Culture,
National Archives of Malawi

Museum of Malawi

5

Ming Chee ANG

Malaysia

General Manager,
George Town World Heritage
Incorporated

George Town UNESCO World
Heritage Site

6

Victor
MARCHEZINI

BrazilResearcher,
National Centre for Monitoringand Early Warning of Natural
Disasters (CEMADEN)

São Luiz do Paraitinga town,
state of Sao Paulo, Brazil

7

Virasith SithPHOMSOUVANH

Lao PDR

Acting Deputy Director of
Remote Sensing Center,
Ministry of Natural Resourceand Environment (MONRE)

The Town of Luang Pra Bang

8

Saima IQBAL

India

Lead Conservation Consultant,
INTACH, Kashmir Chapter

Shri Pratap Singh Museum

9

Bertrand Pascal
LAVEDRINEFranceDirector of the Centre derecherche sur la Conservation,
National Museum of Natural
History

National Museum of Natural
History

10

Domenico
GRECO

Italy

Civil Engineer - Young
Researcher at University ofSalerno, ICOMOS/ICORP Italy

Cilento National Park andVallo di Diano with The
Archeological Sites ofPaestum and Velia

MyanmarOperation Officer,
Social, Urban, Rural and
Resilience Global Practice,World Bank Group, World
Bank, Myanmar

Yangon or Bagan (tbd)11

Khin Aye YEEIntroduction

1

33

Observers
No

Name

CountryWork Position and Affiliation

1

Chan Min PARK

KOREA

Curator, National Research Institute of Cultural Heritage

2

Sophie ABRAHAM

Switzerland

Junior Professional Officer, Disaster Risk Reduction,
Emergency Preparedness & Response Unit, Culture
Sector UNESCO

ITC 2018, the 13th year
No

1

34

Name

Marcia Furriel
Ramos GALVEZWork Position and Affiliation

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipantsBrazilArchitect at the Architecturalpreservation group - associatedto the Memory and Information
Center,FUNDACAO CASA DE RUIBARBOSA - MINISTERIO DA
CULTURA (House of Rui Barbosa
Foundation - Ministry of Culture)

Museu Casa de Rui Barbosa(Rui Barbosa's Historic House
Museum)Trashigang Dzong

Country2

Jamyang Singye
NAMGYEL

BhutanArchitect,
Division for Conservation of
Heritage Sites, Department
of Culture, Ministry of Homeand Cultural Affairs, Royal
Government of Bhutan

3

Kundishora
Tungamirai
CHIPUNZA

Zimbabwe

Chief Curator,
National Musuems andMonuments of Zimbabwe

Great Zimbabwe World
Heritage Site

4

Abel Assefa
GIRMAY

Ethiopia

Heritage Conservator,
Authority for Research andConservation of Cultural
Heritage

Taitu Hotel

MexicoFull Time Conservator,
National Bureau for Cultural
Heritage Conservation
part of National Institute of
Anthropology and History(Coordinacion Nacional deConservacion del Patrimonio
Cultural, Instituto Nacional deAntropologia r Historia, CNCPCINAH)

EX DOMINICAN CONVENT OFSANTO DOMINGO DE GUZMÁN,TEHUANTEPEC, MEXICO

Pashupatinath Temple Area,
Kathmandu, Nepal

5David Antonio
TORRES CASTRO

6

SumeruTRIPATHEE

Nepal

Country-Humanitarian
Preparedness & Response
Coordinator, Oxfam GB (Oxfam
in Nepal)

7

Irakli KOBULIA

Georgia

Independent Consultant

Upper Svaneti

8

Vikas Namdeo
KURNE

India

Disaster Management
Coordinator,
Indian Red Cross Society

Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj
Vastu Sangrahalaya

1.1 Background and Objectives of the 14th International Training Course 2019

9

10

11

DRM Plans of Cultural
Heritage Formulated by theParticipants

NameCountryWork Position and Affiliation

Idrees JEHAN

Pakistan

Disaster Risk Reduction Officer(DRRO),FATA Disaster Management
Authority (FDMA)

Peshawar Museum

Iran

Project manager at Tarh e-No
Andishan Consulting Engineers
Co.(Thinking New Approach(TNA)),
Lecturer at University of Applied
Science and Technology(Red Crescent Organization/
Tehran Disaster Mitigation andManagement Organization(TDMO)

Bazar Qaisary, located in thecity of Lar(my home town),
south of Fars State, southern
IranBelgium

Autonomous researcher on
endangered Cultural Heritage;
student Master after Master in
Urban Studies at Vrije Universiteit
Brussel (Belgium); Intern at
UNESCO Culture Emergency
Preparedness and Response Unit

The city-center of Brugge

Historic Centre of Sighişoara

No

FarhadBANIZAMAN
LARI

Grace DE SMET

Catalin Andrei
NEAGOE

Romania

13

Rosa Grazia DE
PAOLI

Italy

OFFICIAL, Calabrian regional
CouncilHistorical Center of Reggio
Calabria

Italy

Post-doctoral researcher, Sapienza
University

The Archeological Area
located in the ancient citycenter of Rome, which is
known as Palatinum Hill, withspecial focus on the so-called
Gallery of the Collapsed
VaultsItaly

Ph.D. student in Civil Engineering
at the Department of Engineeringof Energy, Systems, Territory
and Construction, School ofEngineering, University of Pisa
(Senior Member of the Italian
Youth Association for UNESCO)

Historic Centre of San
Gimignano (Italy)

14

15

Enrica DI MICELIFrancesca
GIULIANI

Introduction

12

Architect at the National Instituteof Heritage, Romania,
Visiting Lecturer at "Ion Mincu"
University of Architecture and
Urbanism, Bucharest, Romania

ObserversNo

NameCountryWork Position and Affiliation

1

Aditia Rahma Putra

Indonesia

Spatial Planning Division, Municipal Government Of
Semarang

2

Kasaqa Temoinunia Tora

Fiji

Project Manager
The National Trust of Fiji

3

Sehyun KIM

South Korea

Research Assosiate
National Research Institute of Cultural Heritage35

1.2 Timetable of International Training Course (ITC) on Disaster Risk Management

9/8 9/8
Sun Sun

9/9 9/9
MonMon9/109/10
Tue Tue

9/119/11
WedWed9/129/12
Thu Thu

9/139/13
Fri Fri

9/149/14
Sat Sat9/159/15
Sun Sun9/169/16
MonMon9/179/17
Tue Tue

9/189/18
WedWed9/199/19
Thu Thu

9/209/20
Fri Fri

Urban
Disaster
Urban
Disaster
Risk Riskfor forVisitVisit
to Cultural
to Cultural Planning
Planning
Assessment
Principles
Introduction CoreCore
Principles Value
Value
Assessment
Introduction
Reduction,
Integrated
Scenario
MakingEmergency
Emergency
Response
Response
Reduction,
Integrated
Scenario
Makingand andand and
Heritage
Areas
ArrivaVulnerability
Heritage
Areas Response
Response
ArrivaVulnerability
and andDisasterDisaster
Imagination
Imagination
Risk Assessment
Understanding
and First
Aid toand First
Aid toRisk Assessment
and andUnderstanding
the theSelf Self
and and
Key Key
Kiyomizu-District
Analysis
at at at Site
THEME
THEME
and and
Participants`
Participants`of Riskof Risk
Analysisat SiteStudy
Study
Kiyomizu-District
GameGame
Recovery:Lessons
Affected
by
l l
Risk
Assessment
Risk
Assessment
Affectedby
Recovery:Lessons
Community
Risk Assessment
Cultural
Heritage
Cultural
Heritage
Community
Risk Assessment
Terminology
Site Site
Presentation
Presentation
Terminology
fromfrom
KobeKobe
TyphoonTyphoonEngagement
Engagement

Venue
Venue

DMUCH
DMUCH

9:00 9:00

Registration
Registration

12:0012:00

Ponto-cho
Ponto-cho

Recap
Recap

Recap
Recap

LectureLecture2 2Lecture3 3
Lecture

DMUCH
DMUCH

DMUCH
DMUCH

Peace
Peace
MuseumMuseum Kyoto
Kyoto Kyoto
Kyoto
MuseumMuseumto Kyoto
to Kyoto
MuseumMuseum

Recap
Recap
Recap
Recap

LectureLecture8 8Multiple
Hazards
Multiple
Hazards

13:0013:00

LunchLunch

LunchLunch

15:0015:00

16:0016:00

17:0017:00

LunchLunch

Response:
Response:
BuiltBuiltTyphoon
Typhoonand and
LandLandComponent
Component
and and
Slide:Slide:
AidCultural
to CulturalFirstFirst
Aid toTakeda-Castle
Takeda-Castle
Site Site
Heritage
Heritage(Asago(AsagoCity City
LocalLocal"Situation
Analysis,Municipality,"Situation
Analysis,
Municipality,
Y. Y.
damageSite Sitedamageand andMURAKAMI
MURAKAMI
and andD. D.
Site Visit
Site Visit
1-1 1-1 Risk Risk
Assessment,
Assessment,
KIM)KIM)
KyotoKyoto
National
National
Debrief
and andDebrief
and and
Museumand its
Museumand its
Prepare"Prepare"Exhibition
Rooms
Exhibition
Rooms(A. TANDON)(A. TANDON)

Participants/
Participants/
Terminology
Terminology
and and
Cultural
Heritage
and and
Cultural
Heritage
InitialInitial
Risk Assessment
Risk Assessment
LectureLecture12 12DisasterDisaster(R.JIGYASU,(R.JIGYASU,
A. A.
Mitigation
Strategies
Mitigation
Strategies
Exercise
Exercise
2 2
TANDON,TANDON,
K. K.
for Collections
for Collections
Assessingthe Values
Assessingthe Values
CHMUTINA,
CHMUTINA,
T. OKUBO
T. OKUBO(A. Tandon)(A. Tandon)(R.JIGYASU,(R.JIGYASU,
A. A.
and D.
andKIM)
D. KIM)
LectureLecture10 10
TANDON,TANDON,K. K.
Landslide
Landslide
Assessment
Assessment
CHMUTINA,
T. OKUBO
CHMUTINA,
T. OKUBO(M. FUJIMOTO)(M. FUJIMOTO)
andD. KIM) CaseCase
and D.
KIM)
Study
Study
Project
Project

to Dinner
to Dinner
Venue
Venue

Lunch
Lunch

Lunch
Lunch

LunchLunch

to Peace
MuseumMuseumWorkshopWorkshop
2 2 to Peace
Applying
Integrated
Applying
Integrated
Management FieldField
Risk Risk
Management
WorkWork
3 3Process
Process
and and
PAR PAR Peace
Peace
Museum:Museum:Model
ExerciseRisk Risk
Exercise
Assessment
Assessment
for forWorkshop
1 1 Model
WorkshopFieldField
WorkWork
1 1
Ponto-cho
Ponto-choTownscapeTownscape(K. CHMUTINA) Collections
Collections
Discussion
Discussion
and and (K. CHMUTINA)
Improvement
Improvement
Area Area(A. TANDON)(A. TANDON)
Presentation
Presentation
on on(A KANBE,(A KANBE,R NISHIMURA,R NISHIMURA,
DisasterDisasterR. JIGYASU,
R. JIGYASU,
A. TANDON,
A. TANDON,
Imagination
Game
Game
WorkWork
2 2 Imagination
to DMUCH
to DMUCH
K. CHMUTINA,
K. CHMUTINA,
T. OKUBO
T. OKUBO FieldField
Ponto-cho
Ponto-choTownscapeTownscapeand D.andKIM)
D. KIM)(DIG)(DIG)
Improvement
Improvement
Area Area (T.OKUBO(T.OKUBO
and and Discussion
Discussion
1 1(A KANBE,(A KANBE,R NISHIMURA,R NISHIMURA,
D.KIM)
D.KIM)
Exercise
4 4Exercise
Stakeholders
Stakeholders
R. JIGYASU,
R. JIGYASU,
A. TANDON,
A. TANDON,
Vulnerability
and andEngagement Vulnerability
Engagement
K. CHMUTINA,
K. CHMUTINA,
T. OKUBO
T. OKUBOThe First
The First
and D.andKIM)
D. KIM)
Assessment
Risk Risk
Assessment
for forSession- Including
Session- Including
Presentations
and andPresentations
Collections
Collections
Communities
Communities
Discussion
Discussion(A. TANDON)(A. TANDON)
by thebyTraining
the Training
Exercise
1 1
Exercise

18:0018:00

to DMUCH
to DMUCH

to DMUCH
to DMUCH

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

Kiyomizu-District
Kiyomizu-District
to Kiyomizu-Dera
to Kiyomizu-Dera

Brewary
SakeSake
Brewary

Lunch
Lunch

LectureLecture16 16

Environmental
Environmental
Water
Wate
SupplySupplySystemSystemin in
Kiyomizu
Kiyomizu
AreaArea(T.OKUBO)(T.OKUBO)

Lunch
Lunch

LunchLunch
LunchLunch

Work
Work

KobeKobe

Lecture13 13
Lectureto Ponto-cho
to Ponto-cho

14:0014:00

TakedaTakedaand Hirafuku
and Hirafuku

DRMDRM
SystemSystemin Kyotoin Kyoto
WorkshopWorkshop
4-1 4-1
Site Site
VisitVisit
2 2
SiteSite
VisitVisit
4 4National
National
MuseumMuseumEmergency
Emergency
Disaster
PostPost
Disaster(N. NAKAYA,(N. NAKAYA,
KyotoKyoto
Sawanotsuru
Sawanotsuru
Preparedness
andPreparedness
andRecoveryof from
Recoveryof
fromNational
National
Museum)Museum)of Kyoto
Context
of Kyotoplanning(R.JIGYASU) Context(R.JIGYASU)
planning
for DRM?
for DRM?
(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU)
Orientation
Orientation(D. KIM)(D. KIM)(K. CHMUTINA)(K. CHMUTINA)
of Course
the Courseof theto Ponto-cho
to Ponto-cho(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU)(field(field
workworkaimingaimingat at Lecture
Lecture4 4of Valuein in
The Lossof Valuedeveloping
developing The Loss
Lecture9 9LectureObjects
Objects
observation)observation)
LectureDisaster
Risk Reduction
Risk Reduction Exercise
Lecture7 7 Disaster3 3
Exercise(A. TANDON)(A. TANDON)
and Integrated
Risk Risk
Introduction
Introductionof of and Integrated
Scenario
MakingScenario
MakingManagement
Managementof Historicof Historic
DisasterDisaster
Imagination
Imagination
LectureLecture1 1
for Individual
the Individual
Cities:Cities:
Who Whois is for the
Game
Game
The Need
The Needfor Disasterfor Disaster
Cases
Cases
Responsible?
Responsible?
(T.OKUBO)(T.OKUBO)WorkWork
1 1
Risk Management
Risk Management
for for FieldField(K. CHMUTINA)(K. CHMUTINA)
LectureLecture5 5
Ponto-cho
Ponto-choTownscapeTownscape
CulturalCultural
Heritage
Heritage
in inof Movable
The Valueof Movable
Improvement
Area AreaThe Value
Historic
Historic
Cities:Cities:The The Improvement(A KANBE,R NISHIMURA,R NISHIMURA, Heritage
in thein the
Heritage
CaseCaseof Kyotoof Kyoto (A KANBE,
R. JIGYASU,
R. JIGYASU,
A. TANDON,
A. TANDON,
HistoricalContext
of ofHistoricalContext(K.TOKI)(K.TOKI) K. CHMUTINA,
K. CHMUTINA,
T. OKUBO
T. OKUBO BuiltBuilt
Heritage
Heritageand D.andKIM)
D. KIM)
LunchLunchand and(K. OKADA,
NICH)NICH)(K. OKADA,
Vulnerability
Vulnerability
GameGame

DMUCH
DMUCH
Introduction
Introduction
to toscenario
scenario

LectureLecture11 11Core Core
Principles
Principles
of of Assessing
Assessing
the theUrban
Areas
and and
Urban
Areas
: :
Formulation
Formulationof ofDisasterDisaster
Risk Risk
Opening
Opening
Address
Address
Valuesof Cultural Lecture
Valuesof Cultural
Urban
planning
Urban
planning
6 6
LectureManagement
Management
for Cultural
for Cultural
Scenarios
Scenarios
Heritage
Heritage
DRM,
or Urbanand and
DRM,
or UrbanIntroduction
to theIntroduction
to theHeritage
Heritage(A. TANDON)(A. TANDON)

10:0010:00

11:0011:00

Ponto-cho
Ponto-cho

CaseCase
Study
Project
Study
ProjectWork
Work

to Hirafuku
to Hirafuku

SiteSite
VisitVisit
5 5
Exhibition
Exhibitionof ofDisasterDisaster
Reduction
Reduction
andandHuman
Human
Site Site
VisitVisit
6-1 6-1
Renovation
Renovation
Introduction
Introduction
to theto theInstitution MaintenanceInstitution
Maintenance
SystemSystemin Kiyomizu-Derain Kiyomizu-Dera
World
World
Heritage
Heritage
Site Site(A.KOMIYA,(A.KOMIYA,
KyotoKyoto
Pref.)Pref.)Planning
Planning
for Disasterfor Disaster

Site Visit
Site Visit
1-2 1-2
KyotoKyoto
National
National
Museumand its
Museumand its
Exhibition
Rooms
Exhibition
Rooms

LectureLecture14 14

Mitigation
Mitigationof Culturalof Cultural
Heritage
Heritage
Training
Trainingof ofSite Visit
Site Visit
6-2 6-2
Heritage
Heritage
ManagerManager
DamagedLandslide
Damaged(Y.MURAKAMI,(Y.MURAKAMI,
KyotoKyotoLandslide
AreaArea
TachibanaTachibana
University)
University)

to DMUCH
to DMUCH

WorkshopWorkshop
4-2 4-2
Emergency
Emergency
LectureLecture15 15
Preparedness
Preparedness
and and
Emergency
Response
Emergency
Response
to Sannei-zaka
to Sannei-zaka
Response:
Response:
FirstFirst
Aid Aid Site Site
VisitVisit
3 3
and Damage
and Damage
to Cultural
Heritage PostPost
to Cultural
Heritage
Disaster Assessment
Disasterfor Site
Assessment
for Site"Salvage""Salvage"
RecoveryRecovery
fromfrom (Y.MURAKAMI)(Y.MURAKAMI)
WorkshopWorkshop
3 3(A. TANDON) Typhoon(A. TANDON)
Typhoonand and
LandLandSite Site
VisitVisit
6-3 6-3
MakingMakingto Kyoto
to Kyoto
Hirafuku
Slide:Slide:
Hirafuku
Coordinated
Coordinated
DRMDRM
AreaArea
Sannei-Zaka
Sannei-Zaka
Plans:
Introduce
Plans:
Introduce
(Sayo
Town
(Sayo
Town
LocalLocal
Important
Important
Aid andFirstFirstAid andthe theMunicipality,
Municipality,
Y. Y.
Preservation
Preservation
MethodMethodfor forMURAKAMI
MURAKAMI
and andD. D.
District:
District:
Situation
AnalysisSituation
Analysis
KIM)KIM)
Observationof FireObservationof FireBasedon theBasedon theto Takeda
to Takeda
Mitigation
Mitigation
Scenario
Scenario
Strategies
Strategies(A. TANDON)(A. TANDON)
to Kobeto Kobe(T.OKUBO)(T.OKUBO)
to DMUCH
to DMUCH

CaseCase
Study
Study
Project
Project
Work
Work

19:0019:00
WelcomeDinner
WelcomeDinner

KyotoKyoto

36

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

TakedaTakedaKobeKobe

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

of Cultural Heritage 2019, 14th year, Ritsumeikan University

9/219/21
Sat SatSelf Self
Study
Study

Kyoto
Kyoto

9/229/22
Sun Sun9/239/23
MonMon9/279/27
9/289/28
9/299/29
9/309/30
Fri Fri
Sat SatSun Sun
MonMonTechnology
Technology
and and
CopingCopingInternational
International
Disaster
EducationSystem
Designof Cultural
FromFrom
Response
to toDesignof Cultural
Disaster
Education
Systemfor DRM,
for DRM,
Response
Method/Technolog
Prepartion
for the The The
Involvements
MiddleMethod/Technolog
Involvements
and andPrepartion
for theFinalFinal
MiddleFighting Emergency
Heritage
RecoveryEmergency
Recovery:Great
Recovery
and and
Fire FireFighting
Recovery:GreatHeritagefor Prevention
Presentations Presentation
Presentation
Frameworks
Presentation
y foryPrevention
Frameworks
for forFinalFinal
Presentations
Presentation
Systemin Heritage Response
Resilience
ResponseJapan
Disaster and andEastEast
Japan
Disaster
Resilience
Systemin Heritage
and and
Mitigation
and and
Mitigation
DRMDRM
RecoveryRecovery
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
Higashihongan-ji
Higashihongan-ji
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
DMUCH
Recap
Recap

9/249/24
Tue Tue

9/259/25
WedWed9/269/26
Thu Thu

Recap
Recap

City FD)City FD)(C. WEGENER)(C. WEGENER)

LectureLecture22 22
WorkshopWorkshop
5-1 5-1
LectureLecture25 25
TyphoonTyphoonand and GIS for
Group
Work
for for 20112011
Group
Work
GISDisasterfor Disaster
Landslideon KiionArea
Kii Area
Imaging
the the LandslideManagementof of
Imaging
Management
and Awarenessand Awareness
Disaster
RisksRisks
on on
Historical
CitiesCities
and andDisasterHistorical
Raising
Raisingby Cultural
by Cultural
Historical
Site Site
Cultural
Heritage
Historical
Cultural
Heritage
Tourism
Tourism(W.CHEEK)(K.YANO)(W.CHEEK)(K.YANO)(Y. ISHIDA)(Y. ISHIDA)
Lunch
Lunch

LectureLecture
18 18

Lunch
Lunch

Venue
Venue
9:00 9:00

CaseCase
Study
Study
Project
Project
Work
Work

The TheFinalFinal
Presentation
Presentation

Lunch
Lunch

Lunch
Lunch

Lunch
Lunch

Lunch
Lunch

THEME
THEME

10:0010:00

11:0011:00

Lecture30 30
LectureLectureLecture33-233-2
and Post
PDNAPDNAand Post
Shieldand andShieldDisaster
Recovery BlueBlue
Disaster
Recovery
Frame
Frame
WorkWork Hague
Convention
Hague
Convention(E. SELTER,(E. SELTER,
SOASSOAS (C. WEGENER)(C. WEGENER)
Universityof London)
Universityof London)
to Educationto Education
CenterCenter

Lunch
Lunch

Voyage!
Bon BonVoyage!

Recap
Recap

LectureLecture33-133-1
LectureLecture24 24
Lecture21 21
LectureEmergency
Emergency
Response
Response
LectureLecture17 17
Disaster
Mitigation
LectureLecture29 29
Disaster
Mitigation
for forand Recovery
and Recovery
The Lessons
from fromThinking
About
Thinking
About The Lessons
Quantifying
Disaster
Cultural
Heritage
Quantifying
Disaster
Cultural
Heritage
by byInvolvement
Involvement
by by
Respons
Respons
and Recovery
and Recovery
Risk
to Cultural
City Fire
Risk toCultural
KyotoKyoto
City Fire
DisasterThrougha aDisasterThrough
Process
Processof Mexicoof Mexico
Smithsonian
SmithsonianMuseumMuseumStudy
Study
Project
Project Heritage
Heritage
AssetsDepartment CaseCase
AssetsDepartment
SocialScience
LensLens
SocialScienceat National
at National
and and
Earthquakes
Earthquakes
Work
Work
(R. GUNASEKERA)(S KATSUDA,(R. GUNASEKERA)(S KATSUDA,
KyotoKyoto(W.CHEEK)(W.CHEEK) (D.GRIMALDI,(D.GRIMALDI,
INAH)INAH)
international
international
levelslevels
Discussion
Discussion
and and
CaseCase
Study
Study
Project
Project
WorkWork

10/110/1
Tue Tue

Lunch
Lunch

12:0012:00

Lunch
Lunch

13:0013:00

LectureLecture34 34

LectureLecture23 23(M. ANG,
GeorgeGeorgeMinamiMinamiSanriku
Sanriku
Cho Cho (M. ANG,

(Y. HIRAOKA,(Y. HIRAOKA,
MiyagiUNIV.)
MiyagiUNIV.)

Legislative
Legislative
Protection
Protection
in inHeritage
Heritage
JapanJapan(Y. IWASAKI)(Y. IWASAKI)(Y.SATOFUKA)
World
Heritage (Y.SATOFUKA)
TownTown
World
Heritage
Incorporated)
Incorporated)

14:0014:00

The TheFinalFinal
Presentation
Presentation(A. UMEZU,(A. UMEZU,ACA Japan)
ACA Japan)

to Higashihongan-ji
to Higashihongan-ji

LectureLecture32 32
LectureLecture19 19
RecentDevelopment
RecentDevelopment Lecture
35 35
LectureLessons
fromfrom
PostPost
Lessons
Lecture26-226-2
Lectureand Emergency
and Emergency Management
Management
Systems
Systems
Disaster
RecoveryDisaster
Recovery
Flood
Prevention
Flood
Prevention
Response
to Cultural
Response
to Culturaland Management
and Management
LectureLecture28 28
of Intangibleof Intangible
and and
Mitigation
Mitigation
The TheMiddleMiddleHeritagein Crisis
Heritagein CrisisPlanning
Planning
for
Heritagefor
Heritage
Fire Prevention
Fire Prevention
Heritage
HeritageTechniques
Techniques
Presentations
of ofPresentations
Situations
Situations
SitesSites
Preparation
for thePreparation
for theWorkshop
5-2 5-2
Facilities
and System
and System(G.TANIBATA, Workshop(K.SAWAI)(K.SAWAI) Facilities
CaseCase
Study
Project
Study
Project (G.TANIBATA,(E. SELTER
and and(E. SELTER(R.JIGYASU)(R.JIGYASU) FinalFinal
Presentation
Presentation
to Wooden
to Wooden
BuiltBuilt
SK UNIV.)
Miyazaki
SK UNIV.)by theby Training
the TrainingMiyazaki
A.BORCHI,
UNESCO)
A.BORCHI,
UNESCO)
Heritage
Heritage
Group
Work
for
Group
Work
for
ParticipantsParticipants(T. SAITO,
Y. KUSAKI,(T. SAITO,
Y. KUSAKI,
Designing
Designing
the theK. IKEGAME,
Nohmi
K. IKEGAME,
Nohmi
Recovery
Process
Recovery
Process
Bosai)
Bosai)(W. CHEEK
and andY. Y. Lecture
LectureLecture20 20 (W. CHEEK
27 27
LectureHIRAOKA)HIRAOKA)
Principle
for forPrinciple
Dynamic
Dynamic
AnalysisAnalysisof ofEarthquakes
Earthquakes
and Seismic
and Seismic
Sustainable
Sustainable
Closing
Closing
Ceremony
Ceremony
Performance
Performanceof Japaneseof Japanese
Recoveryof of
Recovery
Historical
Historical
Structures
Structures
Cultural
Heritage
Cultural
Heritage(S.YOSHITOMI)(S.YOSHITOMI)(R. RANJITKAR)(R. RANJITKAR)
Study
Project
CaseCase
Study
Project
CaseCase
Study
Study
Project
Project
Site Visit
Site Visit
8 8Fire Prevention
Fire Prevention
Facilities
Facilities
on on
Higashihongan-ji
Higashihongan-ji(S. MOMOTA,(S. MOMOTA,
T. T.
CaseCase
Study
Study
Project
Project
CaseCase
Study
Study
Project
Project
OKUMURA,OKUMURA,K. KAI,
K. KAI,
Work
Work
Work
Work
CaseCase
Study
Project
Study
Project Nohmi
Nohmi
Bosai)
Bosai)Work
Work

Introduction

Site Site
VisitVisit
7 7
Post Disaster
Post Disasterand andLectureLecture31 31 Governmental
Governmental
Policies
Policiesof of
The Progressof DRM Lecture
The Progressof DRM
Lecture26-126-1 Exhibition
Exhibitionof Disasterof Disaster Disaster
RecoveryRecovery
Process
Processby theby theDisaster
Risk Risk
DisasterDisaster
Risk Risk
for George
for George
TownTown
Government
Government
and and Plan Plan
Reduction
Education
Education Management
ClimateChangeClimateChangeReduction
Management Management
Management
for Cultural
for Cultural
World
Heritage
City
World
Heritage
City
Community
Community
in Casein ofCase ofCenterof Kyotoof Kyoto Technology
Properties
underunder
the theTechnology
for Built
for BuiltProperties
and and
Risk Risk
Mitigation
Mitigation Center

15:0015:00

16:0016:00

17:0017:00

Work
Work

FarewellPartyParty
Farewell
18:0018:00

Work
Work

to DMUCH
to DMUCH

19:0019:00

to DMUCH
to DMUCH

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

KyotoKyoto

Organized by Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, JapanIn Cooperation with UNESCO, ICCROM and its regional office in Sharjah, ICOM and ICOMOS/ICORP
Financially supported by (FY2019) Official Development Assistance for UNESCO Activities, MEXT Japan
Sponsored by NOHMI BOSAI LTD.

37

2 Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans
for Case Study Projects
by ITC 2019 Participants

2.1

Proposal for Mitigation and Preparedness Measures, Argentina

Virginia Fernanda GONZALEZManagerSarmiento Historic Museum

1. Introduction
The Sarmiento Historic Museum is a national historical monument dedicated to the history of Argentina
at the end of the 19th century and its president at that time Domingo Faustino Sarmiento. Currently thecollections in this museum are at risk due to several causes. Among the major risks are an aging electricalsystem and a susceptibility to heavy rains. There is also a serious problem of the collections being
contaminated with microorganisms. This is due to a lack of ventilation, leaks, and lack of storage space.
Heavy rains have caused a collapse in one of the roofs.

40

2.1 Proposal for Mitigation and Preparedness Measures, Argentina

2. Characteristics of the Area
Buenos Aires is comprised of 48 neighborhoods. The Sarmiento Historic Museum is located in theneighborhood of Belgrano. It is one of the main shopping districts in the city. Belgrano was a town, thena city, and— for a brief period of time— the federal capitol. It was eventually absorbed into the city of
Buenos Aires. Belgrano is a commercial and residential center. Demographically, the neighborhood iscomposed of high and middle class families. It has an approximate area of 8.02km2. According to the 2001
census, Belgrano has a population of 12,816 people. The population density is 15,812 people per km2.

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

3. Attributes and Values
The Sarmiento Historic Museum functions as both a museum and a national historical monument. It is
dedicated to the life of former president Domingo Faustino Sarmiento. Sarmiento strongly contributed tothe modernization of the country at the end of the 19th century. It has a collection of 3,500 objects, 12,000
letters, and 1,500 books. The museological collection contains furniture, sculptures, paintings, weapons,
and personal objects.

41

4. Risk Assessment
The Sarmiento Historic Museum is housed in a building that was built in the late 19th century. Lackof maintenance, poor electrical installation, and obsolete alarm systems increase the risk of fire in thebuilding.
The Belgrano neighborhood is in a flood zone. Due to the proximity of Maldonado and Vega Rivers,
flooding can result from a large amount of rainfall in a short period of time.
There are currently structural problems in some of the roofs on the building, which could generate majorrisks in the case of heavy rains or fires, as it is likely the roof would collapse.

5. Disaster Scenario
On a Tuesday at 6pm two guards remain in the museum. After changing of the guards, the lights areturned off. The security personnel have their office on the ground floor. Every two hours they make roundsof the museum. As they take their post at 6pm there are no new developments.
Two stoves in the library on the top floor have been left plugged in to a single outlet.
As it is late, the guards fail to take two of their rounds at 10pm and 12am.
At 11pm the plug overheats and catches fire. As the plug is near a wooden desk, the desk catches fire aswell as the papers and books inside of it.
The fire spreads from the desk to the bookshelves nearby. Even though the bookshelves are made ofmetal, other wooden tables, chairs, and plastic
begin to burn, which raises the temperaturein the room quickly.
By 11:30 the guards smell smoke and begin
looking for the cause. As they open the door
to the library, oxygen enters the room andincreases the fire.
The guards call their supervisor who sounds
the alarm.

6. Mitigation Measures
For the effective implementation of a Disaster Risk Management Plan, we need to implement several
steps: 1) completely change the old electricity wiring. 2) Activate the fire alarm system, which is currently
deactivated. These two steps must be accompanied by awareness raising and capacity building activities.
We have to engage wider stakeholders including the private sector and donor agencies. Increasing theavenues of communication might be the model to implement the mitigation measures and reduce risk.

7. Preparedness and Response Measures
To implement reparedness plan, we must first seek solutions already mentioned within the mitigation
plan, such as; replacing the electrical wiring and renewal of fire alarms.

422.1 Proposal for Mitigation and Preparedness Measures, Argentina

In addition to this, we must establish a network with the main stakeholders that allow us to react quickly
to an emergency. We must clearly visualize evacuation routes, needs, temporary storages, etc. During
the emergency we must be clear about when to give an alarm, how to implement the evacuation plan,
while contacting firefighters, police, and civil defense. Finally, after the emergency, we must prepare acorrect report on what happened, evaluating the critical points and how to improve the response to an
emergency.

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

8. Conclusion
The loss of type of collections in the museum would be an important loss for the entire countryof Argentina. Formulating a DRM plan is an important exercise that requires compromise, taking
responsibilities, and understanding the importance of the cultural heritage context. This includes  
identification of attributes, values, vulnerabilities, and possible hazards. This should be put together
to build a risk map of cultural heritage. To reach a solid plan for the Sarmiento Historic Museum, it
is important to correctly assess the collections and the risks to which they are subjected, in order toformulate possible risk scenarios and propose different mitigation and preparedness measures. In order to
respond adequately to a disaster, it is important to be aware that risk plans are integral processes, where alarge number of variables must be considered in order to reduce losses.

Reference1.

Área de pensamiento estratégico. Análisis preliminar de un estudio de zona de riego natural y   no natural. Cámara Argentina de la Construcción. Buenos Aires, Argentina, Noviembre de 2012   
(pp. 5-31).

2.

ICCROM , A guide to Risk Management of Cultural Heritage. 2016-International Training Course (ITC)on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan. 2018.

3.

Preservación de bienes culturales. Ley 25.750. Junio 18 de 2003.

43

2.2

Tor di Quinto Riverside, Rome, Italy

Angela Maria MICELI
Architect
AIAPP, Italian Association of Landscape Architecture

1. Urban Site Area: Analysis Systems

This case study is an urban area near river Tevere. The Tevere crosses the northern part of the city of Rome.
(Fig 1) The starting phase of this research aims to recognize the main features of the area: environmental,
historical, social, and infrastructural. These features are used as guidelines for the whole process. Thisapproach deals with:‒morphological and orographic features of the meandering river basin site. The site is‒riverside ecosystem and its transformations due to natural flooding phenomena.

‒‒characterized by a wide plain surrounded by sedimentary clay and pre-volcanic hill formations.

infrastructural issues, focusing on the strategic role of the area in terms of urban connections(ecological, mobility, historical connections) and planned urban development.
land use and activities, social meanings and cultural landscape.

1This approach identified two mutually related systems where attributes and values (fig_02, fig_03), risk

assessment, scenario, and consequent level of impact on values have been analyzed:

Linear system

This system is represented by the flood prone area between the river and its earthen levee that is currently
used as a pedestrian and cycle path. This wide floodplain developed historically with a culture basedaround sport, open-air leisure activities, and sustainable practices. These cultural practices have enhanced44

2.2 Tor di Quinto Riverside, Rome, Italy

the unique environmental value and distinguishes the area from other nearby urban riversides. Here a visual

relationship with natural elements of a riparian buffer zone, surrounding landscapes and landmarks, informal
2

settlements, and disappearing traditional rural/river crafts has been well preserved.

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Intersection system

This system of cultural and natural values is represented by a particular 'hub'. This hub is characterizedby multiple infrastructure intersections: the confluence of two canals into the main river, railway lines andhigh traffic urban and suburban roads. These junctions are under high pressure due to several factors 1)
3

the increasing amount of city users 2) the presence of the ruins of the ‘Via Flaminia’ , an ancient Roman

path 3) with developing tourist use. 4) the role of ecological connection ensured by Monte delle Grotte4

and its recognized historical and landscape landmark value .

45

2. Disaster Risk Assessment

5

The scenario refers to the main hazard affecting both connected systems. The disaster is precipitated byheavy rainfall, which has been made more considerable due to climate change. The secondary hazards

occur in the two systems consisting of river flooding and canal flooding. This flooding is combined with6

landslides at the Intersection System . The corresponding impact, due to the vulnerabilities within these

dynamic processes, negatively effects the cultural and landscape attributes and leads to a consequent lossof values. (fig_04).

3. Risk Prevention and Mitigation Strategies
Following a risk assessment that is focused on the two systems' peculiarities, and considers the likelihoodof various natural hazards, and their possible disaster consequences based on the assumed scenario, thefollowing integrated measures for risk mitigation have been proposed. These measures are formulatedusing a multidisciplinary perspective.

Furthermore, as summarized by the following examples referred to in this case study, I am taking a

combined measures strategy to reduce risks to cultural heritage. This approach aims to bring together:▶ tangible and intangible values ▶ people-centered approach and ▶ urban sustainable development.
a)Detection measures like monitoring and early-warning systems proposed for flood risk in theriverside area have been combined with engagement strategies involving communities living in
informal settlements on the floodplain area. This includes outreach to traditional rural/river

craftspeople, fishermen, and shepherds. Additionally, emergency response measures have beenconnected with long-term recovery strategies including training, education and participatory
activities, stakeholders' coordination in order to manage social

vulnerabilities and to enhance traditional sustainable local practices and values. (fig_05).

46

2.2 Tor di Quinto Riverside, Rome, Italyb)7Technical adaptation measures, represented by the matrix design for the sport fields along thefloodplain area, balancing land use/social and leisure activities with natural ecological

8

components, and river overflow phenomena utilizing vegetation and appropriate materials ,(fig_06), have been combined with an evacuation plan and the detection measures mentioned
above. This will enhance blue-green infrastructural values and move towards more sustainable

development in line with the urban scale. Stakeholder coordination has
been considered an essential measure in order to manage institutional vulnerabilities, especiallyconcerning the regulation of private use of the floodplain area.

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

47

c)

Structural adaptation measures on the areas affected by landslide risk (Intersection system,
9

Monte delle Grotte) like ground slope and tree reinforcements to reduce shallow steep slope

failure, have been combined with early warning system. This is to minimize risk to people's

safety, road blockages, and gridlock by reducing vulnerabilities associated with the increasing
number of city-users and an overloaded transport system.

For tourism development at the historical Roman-path-system of Via Flaminia, adaptation
measures like structural reinforcement of Monte delle Grotte's cave graves and non-structuralinterventions on artefacts, have been also proposed along with risk detection measures. These
include information sharing, combined with learning, physical/virtual tools, and digital/social
10
innovation strategies.

Citizens and tourist engagement is essential in connecting the tangible cultural heritage values(archeological sites, artefacts), intangible values (historical and natural landscape landmark
values) of cultural heritage with disaster risk management issues (fig_07).
Stakeholder awareness and coordination are crucial for disaster risk management of cultural
heritage. Prevention measures are a part of long-term recovery strategies with the aim to linkvarious institutional levels (local/municipal/governmental etc), knowledge, interests, andresources.

4.Conclusion
The present abstract summarizes a methodological approach provided by ITC2019 with the aim toformulate a disaster risk mitigation plan for an urban site case study area. This project starts fromrecognizing deep ties with territorial matrix of a combined integrated system of territorial resources

such as morphological and orographic features of the river basin area (floodplain area surrounded by

sedimentary clay formations), natural riverside ecosystem, infrastructures, and land use and activities,
recognizing a relationship among the spatial, temporal, environmental, and cultural coordinates atmultiple levels. It uses this perspective to focus design projects, actions, and strategies of risk prevention
and mitigation and evaluate their outcomes.

48

2.2 Tor di Quinto Riverside, Rome, Italy

Notes
1

V. Calzolari: Storia e natura come sistema.Un progetto per il territorio libero dell'area romana,
Argos 1999.

2

National Geoghaphic official web site, Metropolitan shepherds in Rome, on line reportage:
http://www.nationalgeographic.it/wallpaper/2018/06/08/foto/pastori_metropolitani_diroma4012464/1/#media
RaiPlay official web site, “che ci faccio qui”on line video source: https://www.raiplay.it/video/2019/04/

3

Che-ci-faccio-qui-Un-pastore-dentro-la-citta-36f60a1f-efcf-4b62-856f-f48d1308688a.html
G. Messino, A. Carbonara: Via Flaminia: da porta del Popolo a Malborghetto, Ist. Poligrafico Italiano 1991

4

Rome Municipality official web site: ecological net, on line data source:
http://www.urbanistica.comune.roma.it/
ISTAT, Statistic data on annual/monthly rainfall/precipitation, weather-climate hydrological data,

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants5

2007-2016 on line data source: https://www.istat.it/
6

Rome Municipality official institutional web site:
Hydraulic risk and landslide risk site map, on line data source:
http://websit.cittametropolitanaroma.gov.it/, http://www.urbanistica.comune.roma.it/

7

P.Barone, V.Calzolari: Tevere Basin Authority techincal dossier,data sheet on floodplain river areas, 2007.

8

ITC2019, mitigation strategies examples provided by ITC course, case study suitable references:
Takeda Castle, Asago city, site visit.

9

ITC2019, mitigation strategies examples provided by ITC course, case study suitable references:
Kiyomizu dera, Kyoto, geo-grid work ,faillure 1999, site visit and lecture.

10

ITC2019, mitigation strategies examples provided by ITC course, case study suitable references:
Pilgrimage routes in the Kii Mountain Range, Nara, lecture Kyoto + App affordable APP on
tourist information, risk prevention and existing evacuation plans information, reference.

General references‒

Civil Protection Department: Hydraulic/Hydrogeological Risk Civil Protection Plan, 2019.

‒

ICCROM: Guide de gestion des risques appliquée au patrimoine culturel, 2019.

‒

Proceeding of UNESCO Chair Programme on Cultural Heritage and Risk Management 11th 12th
13th editions.

49

2.3

Disaster risk management plan for heritage sites:
A proposal for MuNDA, Museo Nazionale D’Abruzzo, L’Aquila, Italy

Monia DEL PINTO
Researcher
Loughborough University

1. Introduction
Until the 6th of April 2009 MuNDA, the National Museum of Abruzzo, located in the city of L’Aquila,

was the most visited museum of the Region recording around 60,000 visitors every year. The museum’s

popularity was due to its location in the mighty structure of the Spanish Fortress, as well as the richness of
its collections spanning from palaeontology to contemporary art and including local masterpieces from
Roman Age to the Renaissance. On April 6th 2009, the building and part of the collections exhibited in

the museum were heavily affected by an earthquake that hit the city of L’Aquila. Some of the artwork waspermanently damaged, others required important conservation efforts, whereas the building recorded
significant structural damage and was cordoned off, waiting for repair. Following a difficult salvage,

the unbroken pieces were stored in temporary depots waiting for the museum to reopen, whereas thedamaged pieces- including altarpieces, canvas, and wooden statues- were moved to restoration institutes.
In December 2015, after six years of inactivity, the museum reopened in a temporary location, exhibiting a

selection of artworks including part of the restored objects. The following sections introduce the proposal

for a disaster risk management plan for cultural heritage, in order to provide targeted mitigation measuresand prevent future loss of cultural heritage once the museum is reactivated in the permanent location of
the Spanish Fortress.

2. SiteMuNDA, Museo Nazionale D’Abruzzo1 , was established in 1951 in the city of L’Aquila and brought

together collections from the former City Museum, dismantled in 1942 due to WWII, and the Archivesof Superintendence. In 1966 its collections incorporated the artworks from the Diocesan Museum of

Religious Art, moved to the Vatican Storage during the war and then returned to the city. The museum islocated in the Spanish Fortress, also known in the city as “The Castle”, built between 1534 and 1606 during
the Spanish occupation. The construction is a model of military Renaissance architecture that became alandmark for the city of L’Aquila. Its features, such as the raised position on the hilltop, the four bastions
and thick stone masonry walls slanted at the bottom, the ditch and the single gateway accessible fromthe bridge, were designed for a self-sufficient, fortified structure. Over the centuries, it was first turned
into a prison and then into a military headquarters until WWII and the 1945 German occupation. In

1951, following the post-war restoration, the building became the seat of the newly established Museo
Nazionale D’Abruzzo2 , and the former military layout provided spaces for offices and exhibition halls at

the ground floor, as well as storage rooms in the basement. During the 1980s, extension and restoration
work added a loft hosting the archives between the first and second floor, and an additional exhibition
gallery for the contemporary art collections at the upper floor.

502.3 Disaster risk management plan for heritage sites: A proposal for MuNDA, Museo Nazionale D’Abruzzo, L’Aquila, Italy

Figure0. timeline of the relevant construction works on the Spanish Fortress between 1534 and 2009 (source: author elaboration
on Google image and MuNDA)

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Figure 1. Plan of L’Aquila 1575 by Pico Fonticulano (source: Spagnesi and Properzi,1972) and aerial view of the fortress before
the tree planting in the surrounding park, 1928-29 (courtesy of MuNDA)

3. Heritage components, attributes and values
The collections of MuNDA encompass palaeontology and archaeology sections, religious art from theMiddle Ages to the Renaissance and contemporary art3 (Moretti, 1968; MIBAC, 2000), each located in a

dedicated area (Fig.2)

Table 1. Sections and relevant heritage components in the collections

Sections

Relevant heritage components

Palaeontology section

Fossil of Mammuth Meridionalis found near L’Aquila in 1958.

Archaeology section

Findings from the Italic and Roman settlements of Amiternum (the Amiternum Calendar
dating back to 20 A.D), Aveia and Peltuinum.
- Paintings and statues from the Medieval tradition of Abruzzo including icons, wooden
sculptures and several representations of Virgin Ladies;

Religious section- gothic Tryptic of Beffi (1410); thirteenth- and fourteenth-century artworks,- Renaissance paintings and statues from the renowned artist Saturnino Gatti,- seventeenth-century paintings from Neapolitan tradition.
- The original, silk embroidered city banner dating back to 1579.

Urban history- Baroque wooden ceiling of Santa Maria di Collemaggio Cathedral, removed from thechurch during the 1970s restoration and kept in the museum’s deposit.

51

The relevant components selected for the current study are the fortress, the museum collections and thepark (table 2). Each carries attributes and attached values to be preserved within a targeted disaster risk
management plan for cultural heritage.

Table 2: The selected components, with the heritage attributes carrying higher values (Source: author)

Components
Fortress

ValuesHistorical

Original stone
masonry building

Architectural(1534)
Aesthetic /LandscapeSymbolic
Collections-Religious c.
(Beffi tryptic,

Artistic

Identity

Stone masonry walls, bridge, bastions, gate/portal
Stone masonry walls, bridge, bastions, cannons

Maria di Collemaggio cathedral, original city banner (1579)

original city banner (1579), the Baroque wooden ceiling of S. Maria di
Collemaggio cathedral
Contemporary Art

Mammuthus

Religious collection*, palaeontology and archaeological collection,
Historicaloriginal city banner (1579), the Baroque wooden ceiling of S. Maria diPlesitocene)Collemaggio cathedralContemporary Art-Contemporary art

Religious collection*, palaeontology and archaeological collection,-Storage(Baroque wooden

Culturalcathedral)- Masterpiece: citybanner (1579)

Collemaggio cathedral,

Religious collection*, palaeontology and archaeological collection,
Economic

original city banner (1579), the Baroque wooden ceiling of S. Maria di
Collemaggio cathedral, Contemporary Art

Ecologic
Aesthetic /The Park

original city banner (1579), the Baroque wooden ceiling of S. Maria diContemporary Art

ceiling of theLandscapeSocial/recreational52

bridge, bastions, moat, anti-mine corridor

Religious collection*, palaeontology and archaeological collection,c. (the fossil,

Vestinus,

Structure (renaissance military architecture); stone masonry walls,

Archaeological Collection

1410)

Meridionalis

Structure (renaissance military architecture)

Religious Art, Contemporary Art, the Baroque wooden ceiling of S.

gothic painting,-Archaeological

Heritage Attributes

Green area/ pine forest; the system of paths, trails and gardens
Green area; auditorium
The system of paths, trails and gardens; auditorium2.3 Disaster risk management plan for heritage sites: A proposal for MuNDA, Museo Nazionale D’Abruzzo, L’Aquila, Italy

Figure 2: Cross section of the structure displaying the location of attributes within the building (Source: author. Technicaldrawings courtesy of Alessandra Tunno)

4. Hazards and vulnerabilities
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

For a DRM plan to be effective, it is important to perform a multiscalar hazard assessment and identify thepossible risk path from the site up to the single heritage objects.

Hazard profile

The city of L’Aquila falls in the highly seismic core of the Apennine region (fig.3). Several destructive

earthquakes have marked its history, the largest hitting the area in 1461, 1703, 1762, and 2009. The seismic
micro zoning available after 20104 informs about the areas where local amplification is expected and canbe used to map local exposure and vulnerability. In the recent years, seasonal heavy rainfalls have beenrecorded with the phenomena of local flood, which was previously uncommon in the area.

Figure 3. Location of L’Aquila on the seismic hazard distribution map (Images source: INGV, Google maps)

Vulnerabilities

The MuNDA vulnerability assessment is based on the 2009 post-earthquake scenario, using the proxyof damage and the available information about the former emergency plan – namely contents,

implementation and communication. Pre-existing physical, structural, and attitudinal vulnerabilities areassociated with the building typology in relation to the museum’s functions, pitfalls in the emergency
plan, and with the co-presence of multiple institutions and activities in the location. The physicalvulnerability was prevalently due to:53-Structure: different materials and techniques for the additions made over the centuries to theoriginal stone masonry walls. Particularly, the use of reinforced concrete slab and roof at the
top floor and the removal of ties, performed in the 80s, caused the collapse of roof and theoverturn of XVII century facades in 2009. Moreover, not reinforced barrel vaults collapsed, or lost-

plaster and ashlars, affecting the collections.

Exhibition areas: the artefacts were not encased, and statues and paintings not anchored to
ground or walls;

Building typology: the fortress is only accessible through the stone bridge; in the case of
emergency, the first available open area for occupants is the inner courtyard – unsafe assurrounded by untied facades.

The attitudinal and institutional vulnerability factors refer to content and implementation of the former
emergency plan:-

The plan did not encompass multi-hazard scenarios and specific measures for heritage
protection.

-

The plan was not adequately shared among all the institutions located in the Spanish Fortress,
namely the Superintendence for Cultural Activities, National Institute for Geophysics andVolcanology, and the Concert Society

The lack of communication of the emergency procedures implies the staff was not aware of their tasks andhad little knowledge of evacuation routes. This resulted in reduced preparedness that was detrimental toboth occupants’ and heritage’s safety. The mentioned factors could have determined fatal consequencesin the presence of visitors and require mitigation measures to be undertaken, for the integrated safeguardof both human life and the museum’s collections.

Scenario
The proposed multi-hazard scenario (fig.4) considers the simultaneous occurrence of persisting heavy

rainfall and an earthquake during the daytime, in the presence of occupants (visitors, staff, INGV
researchers, and guests attending a conference at the Superintendence).

Rainfall: affects the museum’s surrounding area and the drainage system, flooding the inner courtyard.
Earthquake: affects both the structure and the collections, triggering secondary hazards and cascade
damage.

The building records the collapse of structural elements, facades overturn, the bridge is damaged, and thewater pipes burst. The effects of structural failure threaten the occupants’ safety, as falling elements anddebris block the evacuation routes – staircases, corridors, bridge – and make unsafe the gathering areain the courtyard. Staff and workers can’t facilitate emergency management as they are unaware of theemergency procedures and roles.

The collections that were not adequately protected are damaged, with artefacts falling from shelves orwalls, being impacted by the damaged structure, and walked upon by occupants during the evacuation.
Short term impact: several degrees of damage affecting structure and collections.
Long term impact (from heritage to territory): progression of damage, loss of information (archive),

closing of the museum and consequent loss of jobs, loss of knowledge and values (local history, urban
identity).

54

2.3 Disaster risk management plan for heritage sites: A proposal for MuNDA, Museo Nazionale D’Abruzzo, L’Aquila, Italy

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Figure 4. The proposed scenario (source: author)

5.Mitigation and preparedness measures
The proposed mitigation measures aim to reduce the vulnerabilities acting at several scales and are built

to avoid, block, detect, reduce the hazard, or to build on to existing capacities (fig.5).
Structural measures: retrofit of the structural elements, consolidation of walls and vaults to prevent lossof fragments, floor isolation to reduce the shaking in the exhibition rooms, use of appropriate shelving
solutions.

Non Structural measures: monitoring humidity level, digitalising the archive, creation of heritage ID cards,

improvement and communication of emergency plan, design of evacuation paths and gathering areas,
coordination of actors in emergency, engagement of the relevant stakeholders (drills).

Figure 5. Example of proposed mitigation and preparedness measures for the collections (source: author)55

5.Recovery plan
The recovery plan includes implementing targeted measures for cultural heritage protection, startingfrom the post-disaster phase (ICCROM, 2018, pp.129-135). Currently, both the building restoration andthe collections’ conservation works are supervised by the Superintendence for Cultural Heritage, incharge of monitoring the damage assessment, outlining the repair measures and budget, farming out therestoration works.

To further improve the existing framework, the proposed measures act on post-disaster damage
assessment, restoration and operational continuity of the museum, as shown in table 3.
Table 3. Recap of the proposed recovery measures

Stage

MeasurePost-disasterdamageassessment-Digitalization of archive-Introduction of ID card for heritage elements (with location, features, values, andhistory) to facilitates salvage and prioritisation-Designation of safe temporary storage areas in the emergency plan

Restoration

Business
continuity plan

-Introduction of ID card for heritage elements (with location, features, values, andhistory) to facilitates salvage and prioritisation-Temporary Relocation-Creation of museums’ network – thematic or territorial approach-Partnerships with other national and international institutions, as well as schools

The final aspect to be considered is stakeholders’ engagement, achievable through a proposed pilot

project carried on by MuNDA and integrating cultural heritage protection and disaster risk management.
The project, to be run during the school year, involves local primary and secondary schools, Fire Brigades
and Civil Protection volunteers, and culminates in final drill at the end of the year. The participationof students’ families, as well as the engagement of institutions and sponsors (i.e. Superintendence forCultural Heritage, Concert Society) obtaining visibility for supporting a CH/DRM activity, would contributeto promote the activities and building awareness among different groups of citizens.

References
1.

ICCROM, 2018, ‘First aid to cultural heritage in times of crisis handbook’.

2.

MIBAC, (2000), ‘Guida alla visita dei musei statali in Abruzzo- progetto potenziamento dei musei statali in
Abruzzo’.

3.

Moretti, M., (1968) ‘Museo Nazionale d'Abruzzo nel Castello cinquecentesco dell'Aquila’.

4.

Spagnesi, G., Properzi, P. (1972), ‘L'Aquila, Problemi di forma e storia della città’.

Notes
1

http://www.musei.abruzzo.beniculturali.it/musei?mid=63&nome=munda-museo-nazionale-dabruzzo

2later shared with the Superintendence, the Concert Society and the Institute of Geophysics and3

For the complete and updated collections http://www.musei.abruzzo.beniculturali.it/

Volcanology.
musei?mid=63&nome=munda-museo-nazionale-dabruzzo
456

http://www.comune.laquila.it/pagina1755_microzonazione-sismica.html

2.4

Disaster Risk Management in the National Museum of
Egyptian Civilization, Egypt

Mahrous Eid Moustafa ELSANADIDY
Chief Curator
The National Museum of Egyptian Civilization

1. Introduction
The National Museum of Egyptian Civilization (NMEC)(figure.1) is a governmental institution that acquires,
cares, conserves, preserves, and exhibits Egyptian tangible and intangible heritage (figure.2). In addition,

it provides many services for study, research, education, and reaction to the public. It collaborates with thenational and international community for enhancing world peace and sustainable development in Egypt

and all around the world. The NMEC museum is one of the largest cultural institutions in Egypt, the Middle
East, and the world. Its size is about thirty three acres containing about one hundred thousand square

meters of spaces for curating and exhibiting more one hundred thousand artifacts from different Egyptian
historical periods. Many of these artifacts date back to more than thousands years.

The museum is located in the Al-Fustat area in old Cairo. Al-Fustat is the first capital of Islamic Egypt thatwas built in 641 A.D. This location is distinguished because it is near downtown Cairo and surroundedby several famous landmarks of Cairo city (e.g prehistoric sites of Maadi culture before 5100 years ago,
Bablyon fortress, Hanging church, Amr ben El-Aas’s mosque, Salaheldin’s Citadel, Ben Ezra synagogue,
Imam Alshafie’s mausoleum) (figure.3).

Although it has many facilities and values, it has not yet had a disaster risk management plan. So theresearcher seeks to set a proposal for formulating a DRM plan that aims to:-Secure the lives of museum visitors, and staff.

-

Protect and preserve the Egyptian tangible and intangible heritage for future generations.

-

Reduce losses of heritage values that are embodied in museum collections.

-

Prevent and mitigate disaster risks to the museum.

-

Raise skills and abilities in Egyptian heritage protection for effective response to potential
hazards at all levels.

2. The Values of NMEC Museum
The museum has many values related to its attributes as following:
Value score on basisof Qualifiers of
Value

Attributes

Attributes (Authenticity,
integrity, sustainability,
uniqueness) Low(1)medium (2) High (3)Historical

Cultural

It has a historical location as mentioned above, and it now owns more fifty
thousands objects of different Egyptian historical periods.
It has a theater hall with five hundred seats, Cinema hall with three hundred
thirty seats, nine Exhibition galleries and cultural programs for its audiences

3

3

57

Value score on basis of
Qualifiers of Attributes
Attributes

Value(Authenticity, integrity,
sustainability, uniqueness)
Low(1) medium (2) High (3)It has exhibition galleries, guiding tours programs.
Educational

five classrooms for Learning programs, meeting, conferences, lectures halls,

3

a training center with five rooms and training programs.
It conserves and maintains Egyptian heritage for future generations throughproper documentation, conservation labs and storage of objects in wellequipped store rooms.
Social

It has awareness raising programs for community engagement through3

exhibitions and interacts with community to adress various issues such asreviving traditional crafts, skills, customs and traditions.
It has a study and research center for humanities, natural sciences andapplied sciences equipped with modern labs such as DNA, X rays, chemistry
Scientificwith Carbone 14, Microbiology, geology, Human remains…

2

It holds local and international scientific meetings conferences and training
workshops.
It has facilities for sustainable community development such as pricelessEconomical

artifacts, exhibition galleries, cafeterias, restaurants, a commercial center,theater, and cinema halls as an economic resource for the national income2

and providing direct and indirect job opportunities in Egypt.

3. The Hazards, Threats, and Vulnerabilities
The NMEC museum suffers from many hazards related to its geology, hydrology, weathering, location, andstructure of buildings:

3.1 Natural Hazards:a-

The earthquake : The location of the museum is 20 km from the earthquake center in Helwanarea. So, if the museum is exposed to earthquake vibrations, they could cause fire, damage to its
buildings built of concrete and glass. (figure.4). Then, we might experience a loss of life (whether
museum staff or museum guests), artifacts, and some of its artifacts values.

b-Fires: fires are due to many reasons such as an earthquake hazard, arson, human threats, human
bad behavior, or ignition materials (figure.5).

c-Heavy rain water can cause damage to the museum’s buildings and artifacts existingin basement storerooms because there are technical defects in the design of the museum
as the ground level of museum is lower than the street. Therefore the museum is exposed to58

2.4 Disaster Risk Management in the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization, Egypt

accumulation of rain water during heavy rains, particularly in the case of failure ofpumping engines during heavy rains.
d-Biological hazards due to existing dust on western and northern side where there is aninfestation of rats, reptiles, and insects. There is no anoxia machine to fight bacteria and fungi.

e-

The underground water hazard is due to the nature of geographical compositions of themuseum area, which is composed of limestone layers with cracks and fractures. This can lead toleaks in the building foundations .

3.2 Human threats and vulnerabilities:a-

Looting (figure.6): The museum is threatened by criminals who are living in slum areas existingaround the museum. They represent real threats to the museum properties including ancient
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

artifacts, in particularly, at times of unrest. The number of security staff at the museum is not
sufficient, and their skills and abilities are limited to secure this huge museum.
b-

Bomb attacks: the political situation in Egypt is unstable. Therefore the museum is exposed todestructive attacks by terrorists because the museum is so large that the security can’t watch theentire premises as its numbers are few and staff is not qualified enough to adress such situations.

4. Developing a Disaster Scenario Relevant to Potential Hazards-

A strong earthquake hits Egypt on Sunday at 2:00 p.m. during the working hours.

-

In the meantime, a lot of visitors were watching displays of artifacts.

-

-

-

-

-

The Helwan area was the center of earthquake. Helwan is about 20 kilometers from the museum.
The vibrations of the earthquake caused cracks and fractures in buildings and electricity
cables were broken causing fires in the exhibition galleries.

The exhibition galleries contain big organic and inorganic artifacts from Pharaonic andIslamic periods displayed in showcases. Glass objects are displayed in showcases without

taking consideration of earthquake vibrations.

So, glass objects fall down due to the earthquake and they are broken.

There were three security people working during the earthquake, one in each gallery.

When they see fires: one of them cries for evacuating visitors pointing at exit doors, but somedoors are without an exit signage so, the visitors are directed to doors bearing exit signage

causing crowding.

The other two security people try to search for fire extinguishers. One tries to open it but they

can’t do so. Another one manages to open a fire extinguisher but it does not work, so they try to
use the hydrants but there is no water in the hoses because the water engines are broken.

At this moment, the fires spread due to flying sparks causing loss of many organic objects anddamage to others.

Then, one of security personnel goes down to call the director of the museum and the curators,
who are in the lower floor. They shout “there are fires in the exhibition galleries and someshowcases are broken”.

The director tries to call the fire department but there is no reply and it takes more than ten

minutes to get an answer.

The police and fire fighters arrive after one hour, so, a lot of priceless organic objects are lost andothers damaged.

59

5. Effects and Impacts
The results of any catastrophic disasters such earthquakes or fires may lead to loss the lives of museum
visitors, and staff or to cause injuries to them. They may also lead to loss or damage to artifacts, which will
result loss of intangible and other heritage values for the future generations.

6. Mitigation and Preparedness Plan for Potential Hazards

Mitigation aims to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the effects and impacts of disasters andto reduce or prevent long-term risk from hazards on the existing built environment, artifacts, and future
construction . I propose this mitigation plan that will be based on five strategic levels as follows:

6.1 Avoidance level:

This level takes into consideration the national legal framework and international conventions. Thus,
the museum will need an official decree of the Minister of Antiquities for establishing a disaster risk
management department. In the following step, the director of the museum based on this decree will
form a department structure defining roles and responsibilities of actors and stakeholders built on how
interested and how powerful these stakeholders are. Then, they will set mitigation plans and measures tobe undertaken before, during, and after a disaster and others for short, medium, and long term. This tableshows actors and stakeholders according to how interested and how powerful they are:Figure1 Diagram of Actors and Stakeholders of the NMEC Museum

6.2 Blocking level :-Physical: Land use, transportation, development plan: in case of fire, we should define

evacuation areas (figure.8), remove unnecessary ignition sources, upgrade electrical wiring,
regulate dedicated smoking areas, using electricity power for cooking in restaurants instead ofgas, building cisterns.
-

Technical Level : Structural and Material:

We should prepare tools and equipment for an emergency response team, documentation,
packing, and relocating.
-

Maintenance and Monitoring Systems:

Restoration and packing material, environmental control system equipment (humidity,
temperature).

60

2.4 Disaster Risk Management in the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization, Egypt

6.3 Detecting level:
We should have alarm systems for fires such as flames, smoke and heating censors, and different types ofmonitoring cameras which can work 24/7.

6.4 Response level:

The emergency response team should consist of members or groups who cover the following
responsibilities: coordinator, safety and security, administration and finance, spokesperson for the media,
cultural heritage (to include building and maintenance, and salvage of collections or fragments). The teammembers should be aware of their roles and responsibilities that are determined and prepared in advance .

6.5 Recovery level:

This level includes these steps:
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Assessing a situation and condition of damaged objects and buildings, and their values. Record
the description, material, dimensions, and diagnose the current situation/condition (poor, fair,good, excellent), as well as methodology and techniques for implemention .
Finally, collecting funding from different entities whether governmental funds, national andinternational institutions, NGOs, or individuals to implement recovery strategy.

7. A Pilot Project on a Conservation Training Course
7.1

Project objectives will focus on:
a- Raising capacity building of conservators.
b- Protecting and preserving the living heritage.

7.2

Activities: workshops, lectures, and awareness programs.

7.3

Actors: Curators, conservators, professionals, experts…

7.4

Duration: 3- 6 months.

7.5

Raising resources related to this project by presenting the proposal to governmental funding
agencies, national and international institutions, NGOs, or individuals interested in heritage
preservation.

7.6

Seeking to engage powerful people with a low interest in the site via communicating with themto know their issues and problems.

8. Conclusion

Establishing a disaster risk management department in the museum has become essential and inevitable
for many reasons. The first reason is the need to formulate mitigation plans and preparedness measures
before the disasters. The Second reason is that the museum can secure the safety of the museum visitorsand staff through a proper evacuation plan, as well as prevent and mitigate disaster risks to its artifacts.
Hence, the museum can protect and preserve its assets including artifacts values for future generations.

61

Figure2 overview of the national museum of Egyptian civilization

Figure 3 a table shows tangible and intangible heritage displayed in exhibition galleries622.4 Disaster Risk Management in the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization, Egypt

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Figure4 location the national museum of Egyptian civilization site include ALfustat area

Figure 5 a table shows earthquake hazard, vulnerabilities, and effects and impacts.

63

Figure 6 a diagram shows a fire hazard and its relevant vulnerabilities, causes, and impacts

Figure 7 a diagram shows a looting threat and its relevant vulnerabilities, effects, and impacts

642.4 Disaster Risk Management in the National Museum of Egyptian Civilization, Egypt

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Figure 8 photos and plans of exhibition galleries show an evacuation plan proposed

References
1)

Holtorf, C.: (2018) Embracing change: how cultural resilience is increased through cultural
heritage, World Archaeology, vol. 50:4, pp. 639-650, DOI. Accessed on 2019 Nov. 10 ; Heritage
and Resilience , Issues and Opportunities for Reducing Disaster Risks Report for UNUSDR, p. 25,
2013. Accessed on 2019 Nov. 5.

2)

A Guide to Risk Management of Cultural Heritage, ICCROM, p. 15, 2016.

3)

Cooper, J., Sheets, P., et al: Surviving Sudden Environmental Change: Understanding Hazards,
Mitigating Impacts, Avoiding Disasters. Boulder, Co.: University of Colorado Press, 2012; Warsaw
Recommendation on Recovery and Reconstruction of Cultural Heritage, Ministry of culture andNational heritage of Republic of Poland, 2018.

4)

Managing Disaster Risks for World Heritage, UNESCO and ICCROM, p.12, 2010.

5)

National Disaster management Guidelines for museum, India 2017; Romão, X., et al:
A framework for the simplified risk analysis of cultural heritage assets, Journal of Cultural
Heritage, vol. 20, pp. 696–708 , Porto 2016; Conolly, J., Lane, P. J. : Vulnerability, risk, resilience:an introduction, World Archaeology, 50:4, pp.547-553, DOI,2018. Ekblom, A.,: Livelihood Security,
Vulnerability and Resilience: A Historical Analysis of Chibuene, Southern Mozambique, Published
online 2012 Apr 28. Doi, Accessed on 2019 Nov. 10 ; Field, C. B, et al: Managing the Risks ofExtreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation, Cambridge, p.7, 2012.

6)Fitzhugh, B.: Hazards, Impacts, and Resilience among Hunter-Gatherers of the Kuril Islands,
J. Cooper, and P. Sheets, et al: Surviving Sudden Environmental Change, University Press ofColorado, p. 30, 2012.

65

7)

Nagy, A.A.H. et al: Dewatering using groundwater modeling in Al-Fustat area, Old Cairo, Egypt,
Ain Shams Engineering Journal, December 2012.

8)

Jigyasu, R.: Socio-economic recovery, Research Center For Disaster Mitigation of Urban Cultural
Heritage, Ritsumeikan University, Japan 2008.

9)

Factsheet: what is mitigation, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
https://www.fema.gov/what-mitigation, Accessed on 2019 Nov 3.

10)

Factsheet: FEMA’s Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
https://www.fema.gov, Accessed on 2019 Nov 3; Heritage and Resilience, Issues andOpportunities for Reducing Disaster Risks Report for UNUSDR 2013. Accessed on 2019 Nov. 5.

11)Fitzhugh. B: Hazards, Impacts, and Resilience among Hunter-Gatherers of the Kuril Islands,
J. Cooper and P. Sheets: Surviving Sudden Environmental Change, University Press of Colorado,
p. 40, 2012.

12)

Endangered Heritage Emergency Evacuation of Heritage Collections, UNESCO and ICCROM,
p. 12 2016.

66

13)

Managing Disaster Risks for World Heritage, UNESCO and ICCROM, p.12, 2010.

14)

Guide to Developing Disaster Recovery Frameworks, Sendai Conference Version, March 2015.

2.5

Disaster risk management plan for Los Amantes de Sumpa(The Lovers of Sumpa) archeological site and museum, Ecuador

Enrique RODRIGUEZ LEON
Emergency Manager and Security, Response Unit
Risk Management Department, City of Santa Elena, Ecuador

Introduction
Ecuador is located on the South American Pacific coast. It is a small yet diverse country with importantarcheological, historical, and cultural heritage to be preserved, maintained, and studied. Among its cultural
assets we can count the museum and archeological site of Los Amantes de Sumpa (The Lovers of Sumpa).
This museum integrates elements of the Las Vegas (also known as Sumpa) civilization, considered byscientists as a proto-culture of this region, and items from subsequent civilizations of the same area, suchas the Valdivian (the first ceramists in this part of the world), the Chorrera and the Machalilla civilizations.
The civilization of Las Vegas emerged around 10,800 years ago and for 4,000 years continuously
occupied the field between two streams that form the Las Vegas River and which gives the name tothis human group. Among several features that makes Las Vegas civilization notable is that Vegas is "alocal manifestation of a variable pre-ceramic culture of the Ecuadorian coast (including the fluvial zones)
product of the early adaptation of South America crossed the wooded areas of Central America"(Stothert,
1988). In addition, the Las Vegas culture was one of the earliest cultures in South America to practiceagriculture. Burial customs underwent a major change in the later Las Vegas. Burials took place only at thetwo major sites (the Site 66/67 and Site
80, where nowadays is located the SiteMuseum of the Lovers of Sumpa) of theculture, and according to archeologists,
with the remains of people who diedelsewhere transported to those sites forburial or reburial. The burial customs
suggest that the two main sites had
become base camps and ceremonial
centers. It is also remarkable that the
Site is considered the most ancientlarge cemetery of the American continent, identified by Edward Lanning in 1964.
The Vegas originated among the groups of hunter-gatherers adapted to the tropical forest that developedin Central America in the late Pleistocene. This is similar to Cerro Mangote of the Panamanian Pacific
Coast with whom it shares funerary features, the very rudimentary lithic technology, without greater
specialization in big game hunting and mollusk collection. Possibly their subsistence economy was mixedthat included hunting, not very specialized fishing, gathering, and incipient cultivation of utilitarian plants
like mate, and edibles such as squash, corn, etc.
The discovery area is inside a complex called "The Lovers of Sumpa", in approximately half a hectare and iscurrently within the urban perimeter of Santa Elena.

67

Location and Context
This museum is placed near the western end of the continental
land of South America, in the city of Santa Elena, which is capitalof the province with the same name. Karen Stothert started the
excavations in this place back in 1971 and from 1977, under the
auspices of the Central Bank of Ecuador, an extensive research
program called the Paleo-Indian Project was started. It was
declared as Cultural Patrimony of the Nation on April 25, 1977,by Ministerial Agreement and it was the trigger to develop themuseum on the archeological site.
In the museum there are three elements that attract more
attention and are key parts of the institution. These highlighted
items are: 1) The Tomb that gives the name to the museum; 2)
The burial site the forms an important part of the museum; and 3)
The ceramic pieces of the cultures developed on the zone, mainly
the Valdivian.

Attributes and Values
The cultural significance of the museum, its interactions with the city and a considerable part of its
citizens has made it an important part of the social tissue. So, the museum adds values to the identity andfunction of the area in several layers. The more evident factors are: Cultural (the city, the province andseveral commoners have adopted the images as part of its identity), Historic (considering that it is one ofthe oldest burial sites in the continent); Scientific (only 20% explored or investigated so far, there are still
important questions to be scrutinized); Educational (visits of schools and universities for the permanent
exhibitions as much as for the temporary ones); Economic (many businesses around the site that arelinked in one way or another with the activities of the museum, considering the tourist activities linked tothe site); and also the Social (the site is used in social activities by a vast array of associations, communal
groups, and citizens).

Stakeholders

It might be easy to define the stakeholders at different levels, by relating them to the attributes of themuseum:Institutional; These includes the Museum itself, but as it is under the management on the MAAC
(Museo Antropológico y de Arte Contemporáneo) the main decisions are taken by the latter. It will bealso important responsibility of the Ministries of Culture (and the Regional Direction N°5), Education andTourism; and The Prefectural, Provincial and Municipal governments;

682.5 Disaster risk management plan for Los Amantes de Sumpa (The Lovers of Sumpa)
archeological site and museum, Ecuador

Social; These includes neighbors, who carry out economic activities around the museum and culturalgroups, social and cultural associations that carry out various activities in the museum; the school of theregion that visit the museum; andAcademic/Scientific; this group includes the universities of the province, region and the country as well as
the scholars of foreign universities and other entities such as National Institute of Cultural Heritage.

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Risk Analysis
The country is located on the Pacific Rim, making it prone to earthquakes. There are records of events ofhigh intensity with a return period of 100, 70, 50 years. The last significant earthquake struck on April 2016
in the province of Manabi with and intensity of 7.8 and in early 2019, an earthquake with the epicenter in
Santa Elena during a national holiday caused mass evacuation of tourist in the middle of the night.
As it is located on the coastline, Santa Elena has been affected by the tsunamis, necessitating evacuations
several times. The Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA) has been working with the local
government on the development of technical maps of possible inundation caused by tsunami.

69

There are inherent vulnerabilities related to the attributes and are caused by:• The fragility of the elements of the archeological ceramic collection.
• The use of traditional materials of the area (from the use of straw for the roofing to the use of thinner
for treating the wooden structures in order to repel termites and ants).
• The use given to the museum by the authorities in case of a major incident (It has been used as ashelter in previous incidents).
• The decisions taken for display in the museum (inadequate and fragile
showcases and overcrowded spaces).
• The location of archeological site. (The site location, not far from the ocean but over a small hill inan urban area about 33 m.a.s.l., gives it a relatively safe position in case of Tsunami thereby making
it suitable as a refuge shelter, but at the same time as it is located between two streams that form Las
Vegas River, the surroundings are relatively prone to inundations).

Risk Management
Mitigation measures should be implemented before any incident with the goal to reduce the loss of life

as well as any damage to the assets, elements, visitors, and personnel. Following mitigation measures areproposed:•

Implementation of anti-slip mats on the showcases and store cases.

•

Reduce the quantity of items stored per showcase/store case.

•Organize at least one evacuation drill every semester with the staff of the site.

•

Reinforce the material of construction of the cases for storage and display.

•

Determinate potential alternative places for storing items (within and outside the museum,considering that it is under management of a bigger museum located in Guayaquil, some 150
km away and that the routes between these two museums might be affected or destroyed in a
major event).

•

Strengthen the relationship with the local government, neighbors and other stakeholders(in order to be more seriously considered as an important actor in the planning process
for emergencies).

•

Use of geotextile on the hill of the archeological site (There is an effect of erosion of the surface
layer of the burial site, due to natural factors. The implementation of a geotextile or vegetative
cover is highly recommended to protect the site from weathering and further erosion that might
destroy some attributes and distort values of this site).

In case of an adverse incident the first response should be precise, acting promptly and in order. The mainprocedures of the response personnel will be:•

Activation of the brigades (according the Ecuadorian legislation which uses the
OSHAs normative as framework, the institutions should have 4 brigades: 1- First Aid,
2- Firefighting, 3- Evacuation, Search and Rescue, and 4- Order and Security).

•70

Evacuation of the visitors to a predefined safe area (according to the emergency plan).

2.5 Disaster risk management plan for Los Amantes de Sumpa (The Lovers of Sumpa)
archeological site and museum, Ecuador•

Cutting down the electric power.

•

Lock down the exhibition rooms and the warehouse.

•

Determinate potential hazards activated by the incident (such as fire, water leakage,deterioration of the containers, showcases, and storage cases).

•

Contact the MAAC (Museo Antropológico y de Arte Cotemporáneo, which manages theactivities of several cultural sites in the Ecuadorian coast) and receive information about
the evolution of the incident.

•

Provide support and information to the visitors and public in general (it is advised to train
the personnel in psychological first aid).

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Recovery Planning
Early recovery should comprehend the measures aimed at preventing a further loss and to achieveadequate administration of the incident, considering the continuity of operations, the accountability, an
adequate transition from response to recovery and containing the cascade effect of the main event.
The initial steps to take in this part of the process are:•Documentation of the scene (it should cover: check lists, photographs, video and all kind of
possible documentation).

•

Rapid triage (the triage of victims, infrastructure, and cultural heritage).

•Start the Cultural Heritage First Aid, considering the prioritization according to the value
and condition/vulnerability of the objects.

•

Put the items treated/rescued in a safe place, and mobilize to an alternative place, if necessary
and feasible.

•

Implement a logbook for the Cultural Heritage treated / rescued (aiming to havean accountability and official record of the people accessing the cultural goods).

71

Two strategies to consider in this phase are: 1 –The reactivation of the site as soon as possible, evenadding the process of treating the archeological items to be considered as a temporary exhibition 2- theidentification of other short terms activities of the site besides the museum that can create positive impact
among the visitors.

References1)

Stothert, Karen E. (July 1985). "The Preceramic Las Vegas Culture of Coastal Ecuador".
American Antiquity. American Antiquity, Vol. 50, No. 3. pp. 50.

2)Chancay Vásquez, José. Instituto Nacional De Patrimonio Cultural Del Ecuador,
Dirección de Inventario Patrimonial, Ficha de Inventario SA-24-01-54-000-17-001001,
Bienes Culturales Arqueológicos, Ficha de Inventario de Sitios Arqueológicos, Valdivia.

3)

Chancay Vásquez, José. Instituto Nacional De Patrimonio Cultural Del Ecuador,
Dirección de Inventario Patrimonial, Ficha de Inventario SA-24-01-02-000-17-001002,
Bienes Culturales Arqueológicos, Ficha de Inventario de Sitios Arqueológicos, Las Vegas.

4)

Moore, 97; Raymond pp. 82.

5)

García Caputti, Mariella. “La Figurina Como Reflejo De Un Modo De Vida Valdivia” pp. 19-30.

6)Stothert et al (2002); Moore, Jerry D. (2014), A Prehistory of South America, Boulder:
University of Colorado Press, pp. 96-97.

7)

Stothert, Karen E., Piperno, Dolores R., and Andres, Thomas C. (2002),"Terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene human adaptation in coastal Ecuador:
the Las Vegas evidence, pp. 3.

8)

Stothert, Karen E.; Dolores R. Piperno; Thomas C. Andres (Fall 2004).
"New Evidence of Early Holocene Agriculture from the Coast of Ecuador:
A Multidisciplinary Approach" Culture & Agriculture. pp.24.

72

2.6

Disaster Risk Reduction for the Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape,South Africa

Clinton JACKSONManagerNational Inventory, South African Heritage Resources Agency

1. Introduction
The Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape is a declared National Heritage Site comprising of three farmsteads,
now consolidated onto a single farm known as Dal Josafat Farm 1341, these being; Roggeland, NonParielle and Goede Rust.
The consolidated property lay in the custodianship of the state for many years, until the mid 1980’s when
the area was declared to be a township under the Apartheid area Group Areas Act. Through this process,the farmsteads were earmarked for demolition in order to make way for the proposed township. In
1985 the then National Monuments Council (Now South African Heritage Resources Agency) sought toprotect the site from destruction by declaring the consolidated farm to be a National Monument, thereby
preventing its destruction (O’Donoghue et al, 2017).
On 21 February 1986, the ownership of the property was transferred to the National Monuments Council
in order to ensure its continued preservation. It was during this time that many of the buildings on theproperty were expertly restored to near pristine condition (O’Donoghue et al, 2017).
In 1999 the National Heritage Resources Act (Act 25 of 1999) was passed. This new legislation aimed tocreate a more integrated system of heritage management in South Africa. Within this new legislation all
National Monuments declared under earlier legislation were now deemed to be Provincial Heritage Sites,
under the protection of Provincial Heritage Resources Authorities rather than the national body.
With the expansion of the City of Paarl, pressure was placed on the South African Heritage Resources
Agency for other governmental departments to use and develop the Dal Josafat property. This pressure
prompted SAHRA to relook at the status of Dal Josafat in 2009, and the decision was made to include
the property in the greater Cape Winelands declaration that was currently underway (Ida’s Valley &Boschendal Founders Estate). On 31 December 2009, the Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape was formallydeclared to be a National Heritage Site, and part of the larger Cape Winelands Cultural Landscape.
Recent occurrences on the site, such as a fire which severely damaged one of the main structures on the
Non-Parielle farmstead has highlight the need to effectively assess and mitigate risk within the declared
landscape.

2.Attributes and Values of The Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape
The Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape is a multi-component site located within the Drakenstein Municipality,
in the Western Cape Province of South Africa. With the declaration of the landscape as a National Heritage
Site in 2009, the formal statement of significance is expressed as follows;“The Daljosafat Cultural Landscape is significant because of its idyllic setting, rich history associated withliving heritage and a distinctive cultural and natural environment. It boasts a distinct Cape VernacularArchitecture with an aesthetic landscape design, unique to South Africa. Further significant features of73

the site are that it remains untouched, unaltered and it is authentic in its rural simplicity. The site exudes
qualities less evident in other landscapes of its kind and exhibits magnificent cultural treasures ranging
from fine historic monuments, rich social and linguistic history, with significant farmscapes with a Cape
Vernacular Architectural tradition, to routes of scenic value with unspoilt views of the iconic Hawekwas
and Klein Drakenstein mountain ranges as a backdrop.
The architectural design is predominantly in the Cape Dutch style, albeit that some of the buildings
denotes architectural interventions of subsequent historic period.”

Figure 1: Components of the Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape

3. Legal Protections and Site Management
The 232.5850 Hectare Dal Josafat property (Farm 1341) is protected under the National Heritage Resources
Act, Act 25 of 1999 as a National Heritage Site and is owned and managed by the South African Heritage
Resources Agency (SAHRA); the national body responsible for the coordination of heritage managementin South Africa. However, despite the formal nature of the protection, there is currently no conservation
management plan in place to guide the ongoing management of the site.
The Roggeland and Goede Rust farmsteads are currently leased out to private bodies as a Guest House(Roggeland) and a drug rehabilitation centre (Goede Rust), with the third farmstead (Non-Parielle) being
vacant and in a state of disrepair. The site has however been registered as a Public, Private Partnership(PPP) project with the view of income generation for ongoing conservation of the landscape as well as
beneficiation of the surrounding community through the creation of job opportunities.
Whilst the PPP project has the potential to secure the long-term conservation and use of the site, there are
currently ongoing issues with vandalism and illegal dumping present in certain areas of the landscape.
Whilst South Africa has been making strides in the fulfilment of the Sendai Framework, cultural heritage isstill not included in the disaster management value chain (NDMC, 2005, NDMC, 2017, Mtengwane, 2019),
thus disconnecting the protection of heritage resources from disaster risk management initiatives.
In order to ensure that heritage is protected in the face of disaster, further policy is required to bridge thedivide between cultural heritage resources management and disaster management.

74

2.6 Disaster Risk Reduction for the Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape, South Africa

4.Hazard Analysis
The Drakenstein Municipal Disaster Management Plan identifies fire, floods, transport incidents,
communicable diseases, hazmat incidents, dysfunctional infrastructure, earthquakes, environmental
pollution, and severe weather as the priority risk areas within the municipality (Drakenstein Municipality,2019).
In the specific context of the Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape, the site is regularly affected by VeldFire
events (Wild Fire). This is due to the fire adapted fynbos biome in which the site is located, as well as theongoing concerns of vandalism, of which fire is a secondary impact.
An examination of sentinel imagery of the landscape shows the impact of a previous VeldFire event
occurring during January of 2017.

Figure 3: The Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape in 2017, post fire,Sentinel Hub).

Sentinel data, 2017/Sentinel Hub).

before fire (Modified Copernicus Sentinel data, 2016/

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Figure 2: The Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape in 2016

burn scars are shown as black areas (Modified Copernicus

Whilst VeldFire has been identified as the primary hazard for the purposes of this exercise, there are otherpotential hazards that can affect the site, these being; vandalism (high probability of occurrence), flood,and seismic events. The analysis presented in the figure 4 shows the relationships between these various
hazards, the vulnerability of the site, and the potential impacts of loss of the site.
Hazards•High Probability Hazards•Veld Fire
Secondary Impacts
oWater Damage•Vandalism
Secondary Impacts
oFire•Low Probability•Seismic activity
Seismic events occur
infrequently.
•FloodMore data is required for a
full assessment

Possible future hazards may
include ideologically motivateddestruction due to theassociation with the emergenceof the Afrikaans language

Vulnerabilities• Landscape maintenance is notconducted• Decision making is made forfinancial reasons and notpreservation• No fire safety systems installed• There is no onsite security except
for a site manager, including no
physical barrier to entry• The surrounding area is being
developed for low cost housing
and there is pressure to use thefarm land for housing or othermunicipal development• The residents of the surrounding
housing projects have noconnection to the site
• Cape Dutch Architecture uses
thatch roofing, wooden trusses
and walls require annual
waterproofing• Non-Pareille farm is unoccupied
and therefore monitoring only
occurs periodically• Inappropriate storage of materials
on Non-Pareille property

Exposure• The annual fire cycle exposes allcomponents to risk of fire
• Summer months have low rainfall
in region• Located in an area with a highcrime rate
• Alien vegetation growing alongriver

Impacts• Loss of livelihood for the people
working in the Roggeland
guesthouse• Loss of facilities for the
rehabilitation centre at Goede
Rust• Loss of natural landscape• Loss of Aesthetic, Historical,
Scientific and Associational Values
through loss of the infrastructure• Loss of context with other Cape
Farmlands Sites• Diminishing attachment withneighbouring Provincial Heritage
Site• Loss of values can result in site
being returned to department ofpublic works

Figure 4: Hazard and vulnerability analysis

75

4.1. Impact of Fire on Values
As a multi component site, the impact of fire events on the components and their associated values varies.
Noting this however, as a landscape, the impact on individual components affects the overall significanceof the site, especially those values which are based on the accumulation of the components such as the
Aesthetic and Historical values which require that the context and fabric of the site remain intact.
Value
Aesthetic

Components

Value

ImpactNotes

All components

Score
3

High

As the site is a landscape, the loss of one of thecomponents affects the vales of the entire site. There is also
a greater contextual element that links with neighbouring
farms as well as the Cape Winelands Serial Declaration.

Historical

Goede Rust, Non Pareille,

3

High

The historical authenticity of the site is reflected in the

Roggeland, and Hugo

rural nature and layout of the site. Destruction of any of

Cemeterythe components may also create avenues for unsensitive
development on the site.

Scientific

Goede Rust, Non Pareille and2

Low

There are other examples of this type of architecture. The

Roggeland manor houses.

ESA material won't be detrimentally affected by the fire,

Archaeological scattersthe visibility of the scatter would improve through theburning of surrounding vegetation.

Associational Goede Rust, Non Pareille,

2

Medium The Afrikaaner government during apartheid were willing

Roggeland, and Hugo

to sacrifice this property through the group areas act. This

Cemeteryvalue may increase in impact in the future. There are
additional sites with a stronger link to this value.

5. Mitigation
Following on the analysis above, the following mitigation measures are suggested, based on the most
likely risk of fire related events. In the formulation of these measures, achievability and impact were taken
into consideration, noting the limited fiscal resources available for implementation of measures.
Importantly, fire hazards have already been identified on site and funding made available for the
installation of physical mitigation measures such as fire detection and suppression systems.
Noting the move to install systems for the detection and suppression of fire risk, measures based oncommunity participation and awareness have the potential to be a high impact mitigation strategy.
S.No.

Attribute

Mitigation Measure

Scale of

Which hazards are eliminated?

ActorsIntervention

Duration of

Estimated

implementation

Cost fordeveloping,
implementing
and maintaining

1

Landscape Open(All

Landscapecommunication lines level /attributes) with farm residents Relationship

SAHRA

fire and to vandalism will be

Properties

reduced as the residents will beManager, Siteand provide themmore involved in the protection

Supervisor,

with basic fireof the site

All farmtraining.

76

The vulnerability of the site toresidents

Short

Low

2.6 Disaster Risk Reduction for the Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape, South Africa

S.No.

Attribute

Mitigation Measure

Scale of

Which hazards are eliminated?

ActorsIntervention

Duration of

Estimated Cost

implementation

for developing,
implementing andmaintaining

2

Non Pareille, Installation of

Building

Goede Rust, fire detection andRoggeland drencher systems

This intervention will create a

SAHRA Properties

notification system so that fireManager

Short

Medium (Funding
already available)

services can be alerted to a potential
situation even in the absence of thesite manager or farm residents

3

LandscapeOpen communication RelationshipThis will provide an early warning

SAHRA Properties(All

with local FiresystemManager

attributes)

Watch Groups and

Short

None

Short

Medium

the Drakenstein

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Emergency and Fire
Services
4

LandscapeDevelopment of aLandscapeThe development of a management SAHRA Property

management plan for levelplan which can be followed by all

the site

staff as well as the occupants of the Built Environment
farmsteads

Manager. SAHRA
Unit/ Farm residents

6. Recovery Planning
In the event that a fire related disaster occurs, having a clear recovery framework will ensure thatthe situation is managed effectively, and minimise the risk of further damage to the site throughuncoordinated action. The below figure presents a simplified three phase approach to the recovery
planning process, whilst it was developed under the framework of recovery post a fire related disaster, it
can still serve as a template for other occurrences.

Pos t Event As sessment

Deci ding on Interventions•Es ta blish a multi sectoral
tea m comprising of fires ervi ces as well as
heri tage specialists anda rchi tects•Cons ult inventory of
res ources on property
a nd use this as a basis toes tablish the extent ofl oss•Cons ult with I&APs•Es ta blish the physicalextent of s tructural
da mage•Es ta blish post event risk
(wi ll the building collapse/ do phys ical barriers ands ecurity need to be
es tablished)•Es ta blish the l evel towhi ch the va lues area ffected by the event•

Actors•••External Heritage
Practitioners from sector
Internal SAHRA departments
Drakenstein Municipality
Farm residents

Funding•Cons ult with I&APs•Determine future usageof s i te•Es ta blish the vi ability ofres toration vsrecons truction vsa cceptance of loss
•Determine therepercussions of thea cti on vs i naction•Note a ny s hortcomings
i n mi tigations a nd
ma nagement fori ntegration i n revised
pl a ns••••

External Heritage
Practitioners from sector
Internal SAHRA departments
Drakenstein Municipality
Farm residents•Once the i nterventions
ha ve been planned, thiswi l l need to bepres ented to the
Department of Arts andCul ture for fundings upport•Addi tional fundings hould be sought fromthe Department of Public
Works•Externa l funding basedon the historical anda s sociational va lues ofthe s ite

•
•
•

DAC
DPW
Dutch Shared Cultural
Heritage Fund77

7. Conclusion
As the Dal Josafat Cultural Landscape is a National Heritage Site owned by the national body responsible
for the protection of cultural heritage in South Africa, the management of the site should serve as an
exemplar for effective management countrywide. With this view, plans are already underway to address
areas of concern, such as fire safety, and security measures to address issues of vandalism.

References
1)

Drakenstein Municipality. Corporate Disaster Management Plan. Drakenstein Municipality,
Western Cape, South Africa. 2019.

2)

Forsyth, G., Kruger, F., Le Maitre, D. National veldfire risk assessment: Analysis of Exposure ofSocial, Economic and Environmental Assets to veldfire Hazards in South Africa. Report CSIR/NRE/
ECO/ER/2010/0023/C. CSIR-National Resources and the Environment, South Africa, Pretoria.
2010.

3)

Mtengwane, A. South African Delegation Attending the Global Platform for Disaster Risk
Reduction in Geneva. Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs.
http://www.cogta.gov.za/?p=6696 (03 November 2019). 2019.

4)

NDMC. Guideline: Development and Structure of a Disaster Management Plan. Retrieved from:http://www.ndmc.gov.za/Guidelines/Disaster%20Management%20Plans%20and%20
Minimum%20Infrastructure%20Requirements.pdf (03 November 2019). 2017.

5)

NDMC. South African National Disaster Management Framework. Retrieved from:https://www.gov.za/sites/default/files/gcis_document/201409/275340.pdf (03 November 2019).
2005.

6)

O’Donoghue, B., Orton, J., Pether, J. Heritage Impact Assessment: Dal Josephat. Unpublished7)

Sentinel Hub. Sentinal Hub https://sentinel-hub.com/eo-browser, Version .19.3,, Sinergise Ltd.

Report. 2017.
(27 June 2019). 2019.

78

2.7 The Historic Centre of Napoli, Italy
Roy GIAMPORCARO
Junior Professional Officer in Cultural Heritage
Culture Sector
UNESCO Amman Office

1. Introduction
In the past decades, several disasters struck Italy, its territories and its populations. These disasters areoften related to natural hazards that are triggered by the complex geomorphology of the country and,due to its specific natural conditions. More frequently, the level of damage from such disasters canincrease significantly when natural hazards are combined with the human induced ones.

Some of the most frequent natural hazards in Italy are earthquakes, flooding, volcanos, landslides,

and wildfires. While the human induced hazards that most frequently occur are due to unplanned
urbanization, lack of maintenance, and even organized crime.

Given this hazardous context, the cultural heritage in Italy is always vulnerable to disaster. Our cultural
heritage is widely diffused all over the country and represented in all its different forms— landscape,historic cities, monuments, craftmanship, beliefs, and so on. This situation is even more complex if we

consider the deep stratification of the cultural heritage and its indissoluble unity with the social fabric,
where one complements the other and vice versa.

For these reasons, every time a disaster takes place, the probability of cultural heritage being affected isconsiderably high.

In this context, Italy has

been improving the national
prevention and protection
system by giving moreconsideration to cultural heritage,in all the stages that come before,
during, and after a disaster.

Within this improved framework,
an institutional body has been

established by the Governmentof Italy to manage the emergency
situations. It is the National
Service for Civil Protection.

Within this system, the Civil
Figure 1 - Recent disasters in Italy

Protection adopted different

strategies and methodologies tocope with this kind of situations, for planning the emergency preparedness and response actions in thecase of a disaster, such as the “Augustus method ”, which foresees specific regulations and procedures
regarding cultural heritage.

79

In parallel, the Ministry of Cultural Heritage established specific internal units for the assessment ofdamages that, in case of disasters, should be deployed in coordination with the relevant authorities incharge of the management of the emergency situations.

Notwithstanding the improved efforts that the different stakeholders are deploying, the frequency andthe intensity of disasters affecting cultural heritage is posing new and different challenges compared tothe standard procedures that have been so far implemented.

Some of the most recent disasters, not only in Italy, have caused levels of destruction of the urban

settlements and the disruption of the human life that, sometimes, make some question the necessity ofrecovering the cultural heritage.

Many in our society, especially the scientific community, have agreed on the importance of implementing
a disaster risk management strategy for cultural heritage. Its recovery in each disaster situation is afundamental step in the whole process. Recovery of cultural heritage can act as a binding factor for people
and as the foundation of our social life. But still, new and more effective procedures that really address thecomplexity of the risks related to cultural heritage need to be elaborated and embodied at all the relevant
levels, from local communities to the governmental level.

2. The historic centre of Napoli

Figure 2 - UNESCO World Heritage map

The historic centre of Napoli constitutes a unique place in the urban history of Europe. The foundationsof the contemporary city directly lie on the ancient Greek city and since then, Napoli has always hosted acivilization. Its population and traditions have no interruptions along its millenary history.

80

2.7 The Historic Centre of Napoli, Italy

The historic centre – and many historic buildings – is an expression of complex and continuous

stratification, which, is clearly readable in the city. Many contemporary structures are built over eighteenth
century fabric, which is built on medieval structures, in turn built over Roman ruins that are founded on
Greek edifices.

The constant succession of the ages left a complex stratified context in the urban fabric of the city as wellas on the social component of it. The communities of Napoli keep and make use of traditions that comefrom all the different phases of the city’s history. In the craftmanship, in the food, in the music, and even in

the language, the Neapolitan dialect, the different influences are still nowadays used and preserved by theresidents making them also a fundamental component of this cultural site.

In such a context the strong and indissoluble trait d’union that binds all the components of the cultural
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

heritage; distinguishable but not separable is clearly recognized.

3. Attributes and Values
The historic centre of Napoli was included in the UNESCO World Heritage List in 1995. Its Outstanding

Universal Value according to the inscription file lies in the criterion (ii), considering the great influenceof Napoli in Europe and beyond, as one of the major cities, and the criterion (iv), given the complex andcontinuous stratification of the urban fabric and the architectures of the city that start from the Greek
period until the contemporary era.

Figure 3- Identified components

In the difficult exercise of simplifying this complexity in defined, circumscribed examples, some importantelements of the historic centre should be considered to identify and clarify the attributes and the values ofthe site.

81One of the most important elements is the urban fabric of the historic centre, which is still the Greco-

Roman urban layout that includes ancient structures such as walls, theatres, temples, and civic buildings.
The aforementioned stratification is clearly readable in this area, and it goes along with the social
components that created this set-up and that are, in turn, influenced by.

The church of San Lorenzo Maggiore also constitutes a valid example as a singular monument. The church
is one of the most important original examples of French Gothic architecture in southern Italy. The church
has been built over a previous basilica, and over a Greco-Roman market that still can be visited as part of
the archaeological area. The church also has some very important elements of the Neapolitan Barocco,such as the chapel of Sant Antonio and the façade.

Furthermore, in order to consider also some of the many movable heritage objects disseminated in thehistoric centre of Napoli, the Pio Monte della Misericordia Foundation could be taken into consideration.
The building houses a unique Caravaggio painting, the Seven Works of Mercy. The building itself is thebirthplace of a foundation that has operated since 1607. This works on behalf of the weakest membersof society. They commissioned Caravaggio to make a painting that represented the Pio Monte dellaMisericordia foundation’s mission. Again here, even a movable object cannot be considered apart from its
physical, social, and historical context. Each object is connected to the others.

4. Hazards and Vulnerabilities
The city of Napoli rises from a complex geomorphological context, surrounded by volcanos, at least ofwhich are active. It is located in a seismically active area, prone to severe earthquakes.

There are many potential natural hazards that have caused, and could cause again, significant disasters in
the city and its surroundings.

It is impossible to draft a list of the most probable events, giving priority to one or another, since all ofthem could occur and could cause a disaster. Some of them could be considered to be of catastrophic

proportions, such a violent eruption of one of the volcanos (i.e. Campi Flegrei is considered a supervolcano, which through ancient eruptions affected the climate of the entire Mediterranean area).

Of course, based on the events statistics of past decades and centuries the most probable and dangerous
events are earthquakes.

In a potential scenario a severe earthquake with a magnitude between 6 and 7 of Richter scale, could
impact the vulnerabilities of the site causing serious damage and disruption to the city and its population.

Considering the components previously identified some of the most significant vulnerabilities to beconsidered are: 1) the weakness of the historical buildings that are not built and maintained to face
dynamic actions such as a seismic event 2) the damage to historic buildings as a side effect of the highurban density and the low maintenance quality of the non-designated buildings 3) the difficulty toprotect and evacuate movable cultural heritage that are stored and kept inside historical buildings 4) thevery tight and complex urban fabric, which is not suitable in case of evacuation, with very tight alleys that
could be easily blocked by collapsed buildings.

In addition to these structural and physical vulnerabilities, there is the fragile social component.
The social component has been identified as one of the foundational elements of the heritage site of
Napoli. As part of this site its weaknesses and vulnerabilities could have a direct and irreversible effects on
the cultural heritage values.

822.7 The Historic Centre of Napoli, Italy

Traditionally the historic centre has always been inhabited by some of the poorest segments of thesociety, which, until the beginning of the 90s, made the historic centre a difficult area of the city to be

lived in and managed. From mid-90s to nowadays a social transformation is taking place, supported by
the several investments that have been made in past years, triggering a revitalization of the centre that in
the recent years became a gentrification.

Notwithstanding the ongoing social transformation, the centre is still, and mostly, lived in by the low/

middle class people who continue to keep and develop the old living traditions, preserving the historic
centre from a deep gentrification process sustained by increasing tourism in the city.

In case of a disaster, such as an earthquake, these segments of the society will be the most affected and,most probably, the ones with much more difficulties in recovering after the disaster if they are not well
supported by special provisions. The combination of the forced withdrawal of the residents’ community,

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

the installation of the bourgeois, and the flourishing of touristic activities (BnB, hotels, etc.) could seriously
compromise the identity of the place and its values.

5. Mitigation and Preparedness Measures
Evaluating the risks of a site is a complex process that should take into consideration several variables
and factors. In that sense, the historic centre of Napoli constitutes a very complex case, being a living citywhere one of the most important and vulnerable components is the social one.

An accurate and proper Disaster Risk Management Plan should also develop an articulated multi-hazards
scenario considering the influence of each event on the others as well as their effects.

Figure 4 - Risk assessment

Based on the components identified and considering the vulnerabilities detected, the preparedness and83

mitigation measures that shall be taken into consideration in case of an earthquake could be divided into
two main groups: measures of the physical component and measures of the social component.

These measures shall follow the risk path in the opposite direction to go back to the vulnerabilities andmitigate the impact of hazards on them. In the case of the urban fabric, the historical buildings andmonuments, some of the most important actions to be taken are the improvement of conservation andconsolidation interventions on the buildings themselves as well as on the urban setting. This includes

retrofitting and identification of evacuation routes. Considering the high urban density of the historic
centre and the potential effects of the damages of non-designated historical buildings on designatedones, an important non-structural measure could be elaborating a cultural heritage typologicaldesignation for all the traditional buildings in the historic centre. This would mean that by law the expertsof the Ministry of Cultural Heritage will apply all the necessary procedures in order to preserve them andreduce the vulnerabilities of the urban setting.

As preparedness actions, a detailed evacuation plan should be elaborated by taking into consideration
the complexity of the urban setting and the locations of cultural heritage (especially movable culture

heritage for evacuation). This would be supported by an inventory of non-designated cultural heritage.
The evacuation plan should also identify the closest safe place to store the cultural heritage objects, basedon the type and extent of disaster.

Regarding the social component, several measures at different levels shall be implemented, such as:1) a subsidy system to support people in restoring their houses 2) the establishment of a subsidy
system to support the residents in reestablishing the commercial and business activities 3) promote theestablishment of an association of the local commercial and business activities which could provide help
in the recovery phase; limit the creation of new touristic activities (BnB, hotels, etc.).

Figure 5 - Evacuation plan and mitigation measures842.7 The Historic Centre of Napoli, Italy

6. Conclusions
The historic centre of Napoli showcases a crucial example of managing a complex heritage site exposed toseveral hazards. The complexity of the site poses difficult challenges and some of them go far beyond theheritage management, falling under the regulations of social life.

In recent years Italy has been significantly improving the protection system of cultural heritage, becoming
a leading country in the management of cultural heritage in case of disasters, although many steps arestill necessary to consider the importance of protecting cultural heritage beyond just the physical.

To face such challenges the first and most important step is the establishment of a common platform
where all the stakeholders and actors could bring their interests and where a synergy could be developedin order to provide a coordinated response. This approach should consider all of the necessary actions

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participantsthat will be taken at different levels to identify and protect all the values of the cultural heritage.

Reference1.

L. 225, 24/02/1992.

2.

“Augustus method”, B.9, 1 and 2.

3.

World Heritage Committee, Nineteenth Session, Berlin, 4-9 December 1995.

85

2.8

Integrated DRM plan for People and Cultural Heritage
needs for Mole Vanvitelliana in Ancona, Italy

Alessia STROZZI
Officer
Ministry of Cultural Heritage, Marche Region’s branch

1. Introduction

The Mole Vanvitelliana (or Lazzaretto) isa landmark feature of Ancona city. It is ahistoric building built in the 18th century
and designed by famous architect Luigi

Vanvitelli. Its original purpose was to be alazaret: a quarantine station for maritime

travellers. Over the years, the site has taken
different functions, mainly as a military
citadel since the 19th century. Today ithouses the Omero Tactile Museum, La
Mole temporary exhibition space, andthe storage for movable Cultural Heritage

rescued after the Central Italy earthquake in 2016. In the summer, concerts, open air cinema, a restaurant
and a bar popular among young people (Lazzabaretto) complete the scene. This area also functions as ameeting point for the Ancona’s inhabitants.
Unfortunately, it lies on an artificial island

where the sea level is rising. It is also in an
earthquake prone area: Ancona city wasdestroyed during the 1972 earthquake. It

has a high percentage of visitors, who aredisabled. These visitors usually need special
attention in case of a disaster. This site hassocial and aesthetic value among others,
which qualifies it for conservation.

2. Plausible Risk Scenario

It is Friday afternoon, just before the beginning of the August holidays in the Mole Vanvitelliana.

The workers in the wing that is under restoration are busy finishing the work. At 4 pm they close therestoration site and leave, forgetting to isolate the electrical supplies.

In the meantime, the workers in the courtyard are preparing the scene for the evening theatre. It is freeopening ceremony with 400 seats plus 100 people standing.

At 6.30 p.m. everything is settled and people (average around 50 years old) start to arrive for the Aperitivo

in the Mole’s courtyard. The younger people will approach the Lazzabaretto to listen some Jazz music later
on, while the Omero museum is open from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m.

At 8.30 p.m. everything is settled and the theatre-play starts.
At 9:10 pm an earthquake occurs: people are in panic, but the staff, which is trained for this situation,
controls the situation and starts to evacuate the courtyard through the two evacuation paths.

86

2.8 Integrated DRM plan for People and Cultural Heritage needs for Mole Vanvitelliana in Ancona, Italy

An impediment put up at the end of the street for security against possible terroristic attacks creates abottleneck for effective evacuation. In addition, since the evacuation is through a tunnel, people start

to scream, which complicates the situation. The people with disabilities have also been evacuated withspecial attention.

The bridge, which is the only access to the Lazzabaretto, collapses due to earthquake. Due to panic, someyoung people who are stuck there, try to save themselves by swimming across the divide.

There are some injuries due to panic behaviour and the Red Cross, together with Yellow Cross volunteers
are present to provide first aid.

At the same time, a blackout occurs due to the earthquake: Emergency Teams of the National electricalsystems are working to solve the problem, while the Fire Brigade is responding to the calls received

to assist citizens in the city. There are no injured amongst the citizens. Few damages are seen on the
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participantsbuildings, and no houses have been declared unsafe.
At 10 p.m. the electricity comes back.

At 10: 15 p.m. the fire fighters are called due to a fire in the construction area in Mole Vanvitelliana. Closeto the construction site lies the Omero Museum, which have replicas of famous statues and artworks of

the world. It also contains a particular collection of contemporary artworks specially made for the Tactile
Museum. The Carabinieri are on the scene and have reported the situation to the Omero Museum’s

Director and the Ministry of Cultural Heritage, through the regional branch: Soprintendenza ABAP ofMarche Region. The day after Omero Museum’s director and his team are allowed to access the museum
and have concerns regarding the contemporary collection of 75 pieces, which are on the mezzanine of
the museum.

In addition to this, there is concern about the objects stored from the previous earthquake. The Carabinieri
are called to check the storage. The storage for movable cultural heritage rescued after the Central Italy

EQ is found with water on the floor. It comes from a little room used as a temporary conservation lab, 20
centimetres higher than the storage floor.

3.Integrated Disaster Risk Management
Despite the fact that Mole Vanvitelliana has never faced severe damages due to earthquakes, we can see

87

from the above scenario that multiple hazards are present.
Developing this scenario is a tool to identify the vulnerabilities and the strengths of the site/museum

in order to find answers. In case of Mole Vanvitelliana, it is possible to plan an alternative route by sea
with Red Cross or Fire Brigade boats by asking permission for using the private boats nearby. We should
also plan for retrofitting the bridges and to prepare two kits for opening the gates. For the wing underrestoration, electrical isolation of the construction site every day, implementation of fire detectors andfire extinguishers and, training for the workers is important. Regarding the wooden roof, we can put inplace a drencher system, use back up water system with seawater only in case of emergency, and use thetraditional water resource of the fortress for drinking.

For movable cultural heritage, we have two different aspects: for Omero Museum we have to prioritise

the contemporary art collection, prepare safety measures tailored for each piece following the priority list.
The UCCR Task Force for cultural heritage should be reached quickly and in coordination with volunteers
in the City/Marche Region. We can create access to fresh water from the fortress, prepare and store kit fordrying objects.

In the case of works of art rescued after Central Italy Earthquake, the priority list of the objects has totake into account three parameters: values, damage, and the specific scenario. This means we will havedifferent priority lists, one for each scenario (fire, water). In addition, we need to work on retrofitting thestorage area and fixing the water leakage. We should also elevate the items (no objects under 40 cm).
Safety measures should be tailored for earthquakes. This includes protection from falling from shelves,anchoring the status and vertical paintings.
We should also work through policies:•

Policy for identifying a safety temporary storage for collections: Memorandom of Understnadings(MoU) with owner (private/public), plan the evacuation through a safety route, make a list of the
stakeholder & volunteers for the evacuation, training and re-training as an emergency team oncea year.

•Policy for overtime work of Ministry cultural heritage officers during disasters•

Policy regarding evacuation exercise for Ancona’s inhabitants from Mole

The integrated DRM Plan for Mole Vanvitelliana is a tool that can be used to assess and reduce the impactsof various potential hazards.

4. Way Forward

This study presents two opportunities: to think ahead and organise the Museum Omero’s new exhibition
with anti-seismic support for most important statues of the contemporary collection, and organising

the Integrated DRM plan for People and Cultural Heritage needs. This will be useful in coordinating the
emergency response. Therefore, this pilot project will be tested through a simulation and used as a model
to educate the public and professionals as a safeguard not only people’s lives, but also of their values.

Reference
1)

Omero Tactile Museum (http://www.museoomero.it/)

3)

Italy vulnerabilities: Climate Knowledge Portal by World Bank Group:

2)

88

La Mole temporary exhibition space (https://www.lamoleancona.it/)https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/country/italy/vulnerability

2.9

Wamala Tombs, Uganda

Samson Lukabya NABBIMBA (OMUTAKA NAKIGOYE)
Kabaka's Trail Coordinator
KABAKA FOUNDATION

1. Introduction
Wamala Tombs (also known as Ssuuna II Wamala Tombs) is located in Nansana, Wakiso District in
Uganda, East Africa. The Site, which is gazetted by the Government of Uganda, and therefore is nationallyprotected, is the burial place of King Suuna II (1836 -1858). He is recorded as the 29th King of Buganda.
He fathered Muteesa I who is buried at Kasubi Tombs World Heritage Site. Ssuuna II was the last King to
be buried in his palace and the last to have his jawbone removed after death. He was the first monarch toadmit foreign traders into Buganda Kingdom and consequently introduced Islam in the Kingdom. The first
Quran is kept at the Site.
Wamala Tombs has a large hut that is placed at the top of Wamala hill. The hut that was once a palace
is a mausoleum now. Wamala Tombs Site has similar characteristics with Kasubi Tombs World Heritage
Site. Both sites have mausoleums built with vegetal materials, the main huts at both of these sites arethatched and have the same shape. Additionally, the main huts have names. This particular house is1called Batandabezaala . The Site has supporting structures such as the homes of the wives of the King,2

a building for the safe keeping of the King's twin , the gate house called Bujjabukula , a fire place and ashade at which the thatch, reeds and vegetal materials are kept and sorted. Kasubi Tombs World Heritage
has similar structures. In 2010, the main hut at Kasubi Tombs World Heritage Site was gutted by fire andis currently under reconstruction. Wamala Tombs faces similar threats and requires Management Plans
including a Disaster Risk Management Plan.
<The Key Components, Values and Attributes of Suuna ii Wamala Tombs>
Scores for each
Components

ValuesAttributes

Type of attribute (Movable/

value

immovable, tangible/intangible,

1 (Low)

natural/cultural/mixed

2 (Medium)
3 (High)

Historical

Burial place of King Suuna II (1836 -1858). Immovable, cultural
The first Quran is kept at the Site.

Movable, tangible

3• People from King Ssuuna II's lineage
come to the Site for pilgrimages
CulturalImmovable, cultural intangible

2• The Hut houses several cultural artefacts

Mausoleum(Main Hut)

• Others come to the Site for spiritual
purposesArchitectural

The construction of a very large circular hut
Tangible, movable, cultural
built with wood and vegetal materials

2

Economical

The Tourists and other visitors pay
fees

2

Educational

The stories about the Site are narrated
Immovable, cultural, intangible
inside the main hut

2Spiritual

Shoes are not allowed in the Hut andpeople make requests of the King

3

Immovable, natural, Intangible

89Components

King's twins
House

ValuesCulturalSpiritual

Spiritual

Attributes

It houses the Twins to the King, and other cultural

Cultural, movable,

artefacts

tangible

Some people visit this house for spiritual purposes

Immovable,
intangible, natural

People visit the fireplace for spiritual purposes andImmovable, natural,

some are required to light the fireintangible

Fire place
Educational

Scores forType of attribute
each value(Movable/immovable,
tangible/intangible,
1 (Low)
natural/cultural/mixed 2 (Medium)
3 (High)

Over time people have listened to the story about theKingdom at the fireplace which is outside the main hut

3

3

3

Immovable, tangible
and intangible,

2

cultural

2. Significance of The Site
The Site is over 150 years old and yet it is still functional. It presents the history of Buganda as a Kingdom
and continuously reminds us of the strength and self-sustenance of the Kingdom, which needs to bestudied and embraced for posterity. The main hut at the site presents the original architectural prowess ofa Kings Palace in Buganda. The building's idea of the main hut at the Kasubi World Heritage Site originatesfrom here. During the reconstruction of Kasubi Tombs World Heritage Site, a study was done on Wamala
Tombs; the place is a living site and still functions as a palace. It has a spiritual significance to the Kingdomof Buganda. Consequently, it hosts cultural ceremonies throughout the year and some people visit the site
as a cultural requirement as it is the mausoleum of King Ssuuna II, the father of Muteesa I who introduced
formal education in the Kingdom of Buganda.

3. Challenges of Managing The Site
Wamala Tombs is currently managed by the Kabaka Foundation. The Kabaka Foundation is a NonGovernment Organisation that is presided over by the Kabaka (King) of Buganda, His Royal Highness
3Ronald Muwenda Mutebi II. It is one of the properties in the Kabaka's Trail . Like all other heritage
properties, Wamala Tombs faces conservation challenges. The Cross-Cultural Foundation of Uganda
advances that the culture sector in Uganda faces a number of challenges arising from a lack of awareness of
the importance of cultural heritage, limited political will, and resources to develop and promote heritage.
There is also a lack of relevant and updated legal instruments to protect cultural heritage. These factors,
coupled with negative perceptions of culture as backward, and the increasing challenges that modern
development and globalization present, calls for a deliberate effort to save our quickly vanishing heritage.
Others advance that although there is a shared vision of the need to preserve and conserve urban cultural
heritage, the management process is a contentious one. Stakeholders have different ideas as to how toachieve conservation goals which leads to increasing conflicts among stakeholders. The limited financial
resources available to local government agencies compound this situation, as well as political interference902.9 Wamala Tombs, Uganda

in the work of implementation agencies and the lack of capacity in local government to enforce rules
and carry out conservation projects. There are also significant power differentials among stakeholders
in the decision-making process that often means that local residents are excluded from the process ofconserving their built urban heritage.
Others advance that although there is a shared vision of the need to preserve and conserve urban cultural
heritage, the management process is a contentious one. Stakeholders have different ideas as to how toachieve conservation goals which leads to increasing conflicts among stakeholders. The limited financial
resources available to local government agencies compound this situation, as well as political interferencein the work of implementation agencies and the lack of capacity in local government to enforce rules
and carry out conservation projects. There are also significant power differentials among stakeholders
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participantsin the decision-making process that often means that local residents are excluded from the process ofconserving their built urban heritage.

Figure 1. Map showing location of Wamala Tombs

Figure 2. Administrative zones Map in NABWERU Division

Figure 3 WAMALA Tombs Main Hut called Batandabeezaala

Figure 4 Interior of WAMALA Tombs

4. Risk Analysis and Evaluation of The Site
Wamala Tombs is a very old site that was first used in the 1800's. Therefore, it needs strategic protection.
Kabaka Foundation reports that general maintenance of the Site is very expensive and at times the Hutis in a bad shape. Several times the main hut has been attacked by ants and trees were growing out of its
roof. Both phenomena could bring down this age-old treasure. A disaster risk management plan could
save the site for posterity.

91

5. Disaster Scenario
One Monday evening, in February at around 19:35 o'clock, I was travelling back home. At this time of theyear, it is pretty hot with temperatures at about 83˚ F. At this time, people are stuck in traffic after a longbusy day.
The traditional Site keepers at Wamala Tombs, who live at the site, had moved out for shopping. One of
the two guards was out of the site and the second one was taking a bath when a fire from the main hut
started. The smoke coming from one side of the hut, which is next to the farm, was seen by one of thewives of the 'King'. She is an old woman who could hardly do anything to put out the fire on her own.
She made an alarm to attract the other residents at the Site. The guard who was taking a bath heard thescream and responded but unfortunately the fire had spread and the Main Hut, Batandabeezaala , wasvisibly on fire. The old lady and the guard managed to enter the burning hut and luckily, they were able torescue some of the most important artefacts.
The people passing by the Site also saw the fire because the hut is on a hill. They called upon others whoentered into the palace and tried to stop the fire from escalating with the little water at the site. When thewater was used up, the fire continued to rage on. The fire hydrants at the site were of no use because they
had expired. People resorted to throwing sand and soil into the fire but this was all in vain. At 20:15 thefire brigade that had been alerted by an unknown caller arrived, and the fire was stopped using the firefighting equipment they brought with them.
By the time fire was stopped, some of the valuables in the main Hut were burnt to ashes. The metal truss
structure connections, steel ties, spear bundles, hard stick cladded with reeds, sisal strings connecting thesmoked reed ceiling to rafter, steel beams, hard sticks to stiffen reed cladding, hard muvule wood rafters,
thick reed bull noses with lemon grass cladding, and sliding doors were destroyed.

92

2.9 Wamala Tombs, Uganda

6. Prevention and Mitigation Measures
Against the scenario above, and the Kasubi Tombs World Heritage Site 2010 fire incident, some mitigation
measures against fire have been developed as follows;
MITIGATION MEASURES AGAINST FIRE AT WAMALA TOMBS
Activity/ies thatneed to be done
Organiseawarenessworkshops andfire fighting drills

Duration of

Estimated

Implementation

Cost

Stake holders Involved

Responsibilities

Traditional Site Keepers(TSK), Area Police (AP),Fire Brigade (FB), Immediate
Neighbours (IN), Security
Guards (SG) at the Site,
Kabaka Foundation (KF)
Buganda Kingdom (BK)
Uganda Museum (UM)

TSK, SG & IN participate in the awarenessworkshops and fire fighting drills

Awareness

AP & FB Train and guide on proper usage offire fighting equipment

Fire Drills- once inLowworkshop-At least
twice a year
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participantsa quarter

KF, UM & BK - Mobilise funds for awareness
Programme a
Alternate security Traditional Site Keepers,
guards (to ensure Security guards at the Site,that there is a
Kabaka Foundation Buganda
guard at theKingdom
Site at any one
moment)Promote vigilance Traditional Site Keepers,
at the Site
Security guards at the Site,
Kabaka Foundation Buganda
Kingdom
Installationof Fireextinguishers,
Fire Hydrants at
Site

Kabaka Foundation, Buganda
Kingdom Uganda Museum

RoutineTraditional Site Keepers,
maintenance ofSecurity Guards, Kabaka
Extinguishers and Foundation, Buganda
other fire fighting Kingdom
equipment
Installation andmanagement of
CCTV camera

TSK Make regular follow up

Continuous

Low

Continuous

Low

KF, BK &UG Mobilise funds to purchase theextinguishers and water hydrants

Short term

High

TSK, SG checking on the functionality ofequipment and report

Continuous

Low

ContinuousHigh

SG- Implement a schedule
KF & BK - Mobilise funds for salaries
TSK Identify risks and report
SG - Implement and enforce security rules
KF & BK - Mobilise funds and monitor

KF & BK Mobilise funds for routine
maintenanceKabaka Foundation, Buganda
Kingdom,

KF & BK Mobilise Funds for installation

Security Guard

SG Operate the camera and report

References1.

Hanaw M. Taqi M. Amin, Emmanuel Akwasi Adu-Ampong: Challenges to urban cultural heritage
conservation and management in the Historic Centre of Sulaimaniyah, Kurdistan-Iraq, Journalof Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development, ISSN: 2044-1266, Publication
date: 21 November 2016.

2.

The Cross-Cultural Foundation of Uganda: Culture in Development.

Notes
1

The wives of the King have inherited this position for generations and they still exist up to now.

2

In Buganda, each king has a twin that is revered and kept for posterity.

3

The Kabaka's Trail has 7 sites including Naggalabi Buddo Coronation Site, Wamala Tombs, Katereke Prison Ditch,
Baagalayaze Heritage Site, Kanyange Tombs, Ssezibwa Falls and Ntwetwe.

932.10 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan for Persian Qanatsof Baravat, Iran
Ameneh KARIMIAN
Independant Cultural Heritage and Disaster Risk Management Researcher and Consultant

1. Introduction
In the aftermath of the destructive 2003 earthquake, Bam Cultural Landscape was enlisted on the UNESCO
1

WH List with its exceptional tangible and intangible components, including the Qanats within its buffer
zone. In 2016, two of these Qanats (twin Qanats), Akbar-Abad (AAQ) and Qasem-Abad Qanat (QAQ),
were also inscribed on the WH List (under the criteria [iii] and [iv]) as the Persian Qanats serial property
which reaffirmed their outstanding values. Typically, Qanats run for tens of kilometres with various water
structures, passing through different geological formations and territories, with many shareholders. Since
these Qanats are still active and in use; formulating their management plan is much more complicated.
In spite of all the steps taken globally towards the revival of Qanat networks, still no disaster risk
management plan has been formulated for them. In Bam and Baravat, in addition to common factors that
affect the Qanats, there is a high risk of earthquakes. In fact, all the Qanats of Baravat take origin from thesame strike-slip fault that causes earthquake (Fig. 1). Preparing a risk management plan is of the utmost
importance according to the UNESCO annual state of conservation for Persian Qanats.

Figure 1 Left: Core zone, buffer zone and agricultural demand area of twin Qanats. Right: Aerial view of agricultural area andoutlet of twin Qanats in Baravat (ICHHTO, 2015).

94

2.10 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan for Persian Qanats of Baravat, Iran

2. Key Components and Values
Qanat is considered as a man-made ecosystem, comprising of different tangible and intangible elements.
The key component of a Qanat is its physical earthen structure, including the vertical shafts and horizontal
channel. Its intangible heritage consists of a strict social structure a wealth of indigenous knowledge,
and traditional practices and rituals (cultural value). The genesis of Baravat, as a significant oasis in thesoutheast desert of Iran completely relies on Qanats. This sustainable hydraulic system endured for morethan two thousand years, reflecting the desert-specific style of architecture and landscape (architecture
value). AAQ and QAQ are considered as relatively new Qanats that are 100 years old. They clearly show thetransfer of traditional knowledge from ancestors to new generations. The precise layout at the fault has
been done so skillfully that they are regarded as two of the best newly dug Qanats of the region (technical
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participantsvalue) (ICHHTO, 2015). With 640 shareholders and 358 ha of agricultural demand area (economic value),they attract 16,000 tourists annually (touristic value).

3. Key Hazards and Impacts
Bam region is prone to multiple natural and human-induced hazards. The main primary natural hazards
affecting Qanats of Baravat are earthquakes, floods, sandstorms, and droughts, leading to secondary
hazards like landslides, block falls, and sinkholes. Urban sprawl and environmental pressure are the key
threats, results in violation of their buffer zone and depletion of the groundwater table and consequently
malfunction of Qanats. Some of the significant vulnerabilities and impacts associated with the possible
hazards are mentioned below.

Earthquake is the most probable and destructive hazard in the region, threating the twin Qanats as well.
The reconstruction process after the 2003 earthquake overlooked the dynamic relationship between
the components of this system and invested mostly in structural engineering measures which caused
irreversible changes in the social structure and managerial system. Before the earthquake every Qanat hada council which traditionally managed water division and ownership. In the wake of the earthquake all the
traditional ownership documents went missing and the qanat management system fell into the handsof such governmental organization as Ministry of Jihad Agriculture (MoJA) who did not know too muchabout the intricate mechanism of traditional water management systems in a multidisciplinary context(Semsar Yazdi & Labbaf Khaneiki, 2017). To address these issues the main focus of the proposed measuresin the following sections are placed on both earthen and social structure.

95

4. Mitigation Measures
One of the major phenomena that extremely degrades the condition of Qanats is the urban sprawl. Qanats
have a buffer zone that differs along its path. Generally, there should be no construction within 5 metersof its course on each side. In Baravat, however, this buffer zone is not preserved accurately anymore(Fig. 2), like many other cities in the country. Besides endangering the integrity of this heritage property,
the uncontrolled sprawling development can also directly damage buildings and lifelines at the time ofdisaster as the qanat might collapse. To address this issue, the boundaries of their buffer zones should bemarked on the ground permanently and also strict laws and regulations should prevent any construction
within their buffer zone.

Figure 2 The course of QAQ (blue line) and AAQ (orange line) in 2004 (left) and 2019 (right), showing construction sprawl
within the Qanats’ buffer zone through time.

Moreover, to reduce the impacts on the values, authenticity, and integrity of the Qanats, a number of
mitigation measures are listed below, addressing different vulnerabilities associated with the mentioned
hazards, particularly the earthquake.

✓ Mitigation measures for earthen structures●

Strengthening of Qanat structure against collapsing, by utilizing ceramic or concrete
hoops, especially in the most vulnerable parts●

Conducting research to develop more sustainable techniques to strengthen the
structure with softer interventions, employing modern technologies which preserve
the authenticity of Qanats●

Undertaking field observations to map the precise course of Qanats and making surethat the collapse of Qanats will not cause damages to the buildings and lifelines✓ Mitigation measures addressing fragile social structure●

Identifying and documenting the precise traditional social structure behind each Qanat●

Acknowledging and strengthening the bonding and cooperation of local community
by governmental organisations●

Investing in the younger generation to participate in Qanat conservation and utilizing
their capacities for community-based interventions after a disaster✓ Mitigation measures addressing no proper documentation●

Proper documentation of the oral knowledge associated with Qanats, traditional
techniques and know-how, and also the latest information of all the shareholders

962.10 Formulating Disaster Risk Management Plan for Persian Qanats of Baravat, Iran●

Digitalisation of the collected data, especially paper documents like the endowments●

Founding a museum to store the historic documents and to keep the indigenous
knowledge of the Qanats of the region alive✓ Mitigation measures through clear allocation of roles and responsibilities●

Allocating clear roles and responsibilities to all the actors and stakeholders●

Reaffirming the intricate mechanism of traditional water management system of Qanat(both authorities and locals)(like before the 2003 earthquake) and giving the management system back to the local
council instead of MoJA●

Specifying which national and international NGOs and private sectors can intervene in
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

the aftermath of a disaster and how they can be the most efficient

5. Emergency Measures
Generally, no evacuation plan, warning systems and drills are needed for Qanats, during the first 72 hours
following a disaster. But the following measures should be undertaken to avoid further problems.

✓ Emergency measures addressing earthen structure●

Conducting rapid damage and risk assessment of Qanats and agricultural areas at theearly stage of the disaster for a comprehensive situational analysis by employing thehelp of beneficiaries and local volunteers●

Holding meetings with Qanat steering committee (emergency response team) todecide the best approach for Qanat rehabilitation based on the damage and risk
assessment and previous studies✓ Emergency measures addressing no proper documentation●

Rescuing and undertaking first aid measures for Qanats’ documents and endowments

6. Recovery Measures
In the recovery phase, taking non-structural measures as well as structural measures into account isimperative. As Garnier et al (2013) states the objective is not only to reconstruct built environments but
to reconstruct the social and cultural fabric of communities, strengthening links between populations
and their environment. Some recovery measures regarding the earthen structure and social structure aresuggested below:✓ Recovery measures addressing earthen structure●

Conducting detailed damage and risk assessment of Qanats and agricultural area, byemploying the help of Qanats’ beneficiaries and local volunteers●

Allocating budget, providing tools and equipment and mobilising local Qanat masters
and workers to start the rehabilitation of collapsed Qanats✓ Recovery measures addressing fragile social structure●

Ensuring the engagement of Qanat’s beneficiaries in the decision-making process:reviving the traditional council, Shora-yar (Town Council’s Friend) system, based on the97cooperation system revolving around Qanats●

Allocating seed money to start small scale businesses for short time economic recovery,e.g. prompting the traditional handicrafts, to avoid the total collapse of Qanat-based
economy●Holding training sessions for women empowerment and capacity building to engage
them in the continuity of economic and social activities and find out how they cancontribute to Qanat rehabilitation

7. Conclusion
Qanat is a man-made ecosystems and revolve around the communal water management system.
Consequently, any intervention including mitigation, emergency, and recovery measures should becommunity-based and address all the components of this system. After identifying the components andvalues of Baravat’s Qanats, and the key hazards and vulnerabilities that impact them, this paper tried tosuggest some of the basic measures that should be included in the DRM plan of Qanats of Baravat. As aresult it will:●

minimize the impacts of hazards and potential threats on the Qanats of Baravat andaccordingly lead to better preservation of the city’s economy and identity;●

take the first step towards more efficient collaboration between CH organisations
and DRM sectors in the country and mobilises the main stakeholders;●

help to develop the basic framework of DRM for WH Qanats which is applicable forthe other Qanats as well; and●address UNESCO’s State of Conservation for Persian Qanats which urges theState Party to include, as a matter of priority, sections on strategic risk management

References

and sustainable tourism management in the integrated management system.

1) Bonine, M.: From Qanat to kort: traditional irrigation terminology and practices in central Iran, Journal of
the British Institute of Persian Studies, Vol. XX, London, 1982.
2) ICHHTO: The Persian Qanat: for Inscription on the World Heritage List (Executive Summary), UNESCOWorld Heritage Centre, 2015.
3) Semsar Yazdi, A.A., Labbaf Khaneiki, M.: Qanat knowledge: construction and maintenance, Springer,
Netherlands, 2017.
4) Garnier, P., Moles, O., Caimi, A., Gandreau, D., Hofmann, M.: Natural hazards, disasters and local
development, CRAterre Editions, 2013.

Notes
1. Qanat is a gently-sloping subterranean channel which taps a water-bearing zone at a higher elevation
than cultivated lands (Bonine, 1982).

98

2.11

DRM Plan for the Buddhist Vihara at Paharpur,Bangladesh

Shah Zahidur RAHMAN
Shelter Specialist
UNDP Bangladesh

1. Introduction
Somapura Mahavihara in Paharpur
is located in the northwest of

Bangladesh in the district of Naogaon.
The site’s Latitude / Longitude is

25.0311°N 88.9773°E and the nearest
city is Bogra. It is the second largest

single Buddhist monastery on southof the Himalayas and is a declared
World Heritage site based on it’sarchitectural, archeological, religious
and landscape value. The site is oneof the most spectacular and important pre-Islamic monuments in Bangladesh dating back from late 8th

to the 12th century. Over the historic periods, it has undergone many changes. The structures have beenburied and disappeared or have been restored and today we have an oversimplified picture of the site.

Under the World Heritage Convention, Bangladesh signed up to the obligation of preserving Somapura
Mahavihara in Paharpur properties for future generations.

2. Values, Criterion and Attributes

Table 1: Values, Criterion and Attributes

Values

Artistic

Criterion (i) as per OUVThe striking architectural form introduced
at Paharpur is first time in Asia, profoundly
influenced the subsequent construction of
temples of Pagan in Myanmar, Java andArchitectural Cambodia.
The craftsmanship of Paharpur terracotta
still endures since the 8th century A.D. in
the whole of deltaic lands around.

Religious

Attributes

The symmetrical layout and massively built A large square quadrangle measuring approximately 920 feet, withsingle unit of the monastery was perfectly the main entrance, an elaborate structure, on the northern side.
adapted to its religious function.
Simple, harmonious lines and its profusion The outer walls of the monastery are formed by rows of 177
of carved decoration, in stone and terracotta. cells that face inwards toward the main shrine in the center of thecourtyard.
The main central shrine has a cruciform ground plan.
A terraced superstructure that rises in three terraces above groundlevel to a height of about 70 feet.
The upper level is a massive rectangular central block that forms
the central brick shaft.
A wide circumambulatory 15 feet terrace path that passes fourmain chapels or mandapas architectural plan.
Bands of terracotta plaques running around the full perimeter ofthe shrine.

The Great Monastery evidences the rise of At the base of the shrine, there are over 60 stone sculptures which
Maharaja Buddhism in Bengal from the 7th depict a variety of Hindu divinities.
century onwards.
Epigraphic records testify that the cultural and religious life of thisA renowned centre of Buddhist religion and great Vihara, were closely linked with the contemporary Buddhist
culture during the royal Patronage of Pala centres of fame and history at Bohdgaya and Nalanda.
Dynasty and was a renowned intellectual
centre until the 17th century.
Many Buddhist treatises were completed at Paharpur.
A centre where the Vajrayana trend of Mahayana Buddhism waspracticed.

99

3. Key hazards, Attributes and Vulnerabilities
The Somapura Mahavihara is exposed mainly to earthquakes, climate change, and rapid urbanizationthat may threaten its integrity and compromise its value. The site falls under a tectonic block at the

Bogra fault zone with a maximum predicted magnitude of earthquake 7.0. This makes the site mostvulnerable to earthquake among other natural hazards. Given the exponential rate of urbanization, andthe inherent risks of earthquake and climate change impacts, disaster risk at Somapura Mahavihara is not

only a measure of external potential threats but also of the inherent vulnerabilities existing at site i.e. poor
drainage, absence of skilled conservation experts, unplanned excavation with a risk of land subsidence,and limited fire safety protective measures at museum site.

Chart 1: Hazards and Potential Threats

The entire area is in a suburb or rural setting with rural people, crop fields, ponds, canals, andlocal habitation. There is no defined buffer zone yet and the site location is easily accessible bytrespassers because of absence of any physical or visual boundary. Illiteracy about the historicvalue of the site and being a developing country are issues. Activities like illegal acquiring of land,looting, vandalism and stealing precious evidences around the site are considered as threat. Given
that context, this DRM plan will be limited to earthquake and its secondary hazards only i.e. fire,landslide/subsidence and theft/vandalism.

4. Hazard, Attributes and Vulnerability Relations
The Bangladesh Archaeological Department is the only authority responsible for excavation andpreserving ancient structures. An adjacent museum established by this department exhibits evidences ofcollected sculptural pieces, terracotta plaques, pottery, domestic tools, ornaments, coins, seals, sealings,

votive stupas etc. from excavation, which is a major tourist attraction. The site custodian also runs the site

museum, guesthouse and other site properties with limited resources. The following box describe in detailthe various built and natural attributes of the site and their vulnerability to hazards:

100

2.11 DRM Plan for the Buddhist Vihara at Paharpur,Bangladesh

Table2: Hazard, Attributes and Vulnerability Relations

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

5. Drawing Risk Scenarios

for DRM Plan

I will describe a hypotheticaldisaster describing a sequence ofpossible events triggered by anearthquake during daytime. Due toa tectonic movement near Dauki
Fault; 350 km east of the site, theBogra fault zone felt a jolt of amagnitude of 5.0 that caused cracks
and land subsidence at the central
shrine, collapsing the museum roof.
Fire breaks out inside the museum.
Poor tourist management triggers
uncontrolled movement and causes
theft and vandalism resulting indiverse impacts on one or more
attributes and values.

101

6. Proposal of Mitigation Measures for Prevention, Response and Recovery
With this scenario, the DRM plan for a catastrophic
event, i.e. earthquakes, possible actions at various
stages of disaster management cycle have beenplanned. As part of the disaster risk mitigation andpreparedness measures immediate actions thatshould be developed for the site are planned which
includes; upgrading and adapting modern andautomated firefighting system, earthquake resistantdisplay of items at the museum, delineationof a buffer zone, tourist control guidelines, anevacuation plan, training of community volunteers,
and a post disaster damage and loss assessment
format etc.
Fig 1: DM Phases for Cultural Heritage(Source: A Training Guide | DRM of CH in Urban Area, Page 34)

An evacuation plan for the central shrine and the interior of the museum has been planned deliberately,
which depicted possible actions for site management authority, area for salvaging of the collection,
location and routes towards assembly area, and engagement of community volunteers. In the event of firerisk, a plan for rescuing valuable museum items, and tourists inside the museum has been dealt with at adifferent time frame than for the evacuation.
In the response phase, planning for restoration of the damaged site and museum with rapid assessment
is crucial. Scaffolding and shoring arrangement for structural stability of the brick masonry walls has
been planned for thecentral shrines andmuseum building.
Security arrangements
and cordoning the site
along with first aid,salvage, stabilization of thedamaged parts of museum
and shrine have also been
considered. Relevant
stakeholders’ involvement
and evacuation plan havealso been outlined.

Fig 2: Evacuation Plan-CH Site and Museum102

2.11 DRM Plan for the Buddhist Vihara at Paharpur,Bangladesh

Fig 3: Evacuation Drill at Museum Site (The most realistic museum building plan is assumed)
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

It is essential to coordinate with different stakeholders and actors with their specific roles andresponsibilities during different phases of DRM plan. Involvement of national and international actors

during recovery was found to be a major issue where it is essential to coordinate and link with different
stakeholders’ specific roles and responsibilities.

For post disaster recovery, a two-stage approach has been outlined. Within three months of the disaster,
restoration of damaged sites and the museum will be given the priority with necessary safety measures
like scaffolding and shoring arrangement for structural stability of brick masonry walls. To support thepost disaster needs assessment (PDNA) planning, a probable damage and loss calculation for the heritagesite and museum will be proposed.

Table 3: Recovery Planning -Damage and Loss Assessment for PDNA

Attributes

Estimated Cost

1. Cost of rehabilitating (repair of cracks, broken terracotta, central shrine land filling), cost for
restoration works (Brick walls, retrofitting, cost of engaging labor and cultural practitioners,
Built heritage reproducers of bricks and terracotta).
Site
2. Loss of income (goods and services related to cultural tourism and services), loss of business
opportunities by local shops owners.

Museum

1. Cost of demolishing and debris removal, rebuilding the collapse rooms, retrofitting, salvage
storage construction, cost of restoration of shelve and labor.
2. Cost of expert Professionals, consultants, site management, cost of service staff for immediate
temporary functioning of the museum.

7. Conclusions

Bangladesh is committed to implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Sendai

Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR), where the protection of cultural heritage has been given
due importance. Considering the risk & vulnerability of the heritage sites we must give priority to disaster

preparedness such as preparing a DRM Plan, conducting simulation exercises, identifying evacuationroutes, and implementing mitigation measures while linking with government policies. All of thesemeasures should be applied during various phases of disaster management cycle.

References1.
2.

Web https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/322/
Study Report by David Michelmore on “Management Plan for the Buddhist Vihara at Paharpur(Unpublished)

103

2.12

Development of Disaster Risk Management plan for
Geological Museum, Armenia

Lilit GEVORGYAN
Researcher
Institute of Geological Sciences of National Academy of Sciences of Armenia

1. Introduction
Armenia is a small mountainous country in South Caucasus lying between Turkey, Iran, Georgia, andAzerbaijan. A brief review of Armenia’s natural hazard risk profile shows that more than 80% of the
population is exposed to multiple geological and weather related catastrophic events.

Cultural heritage affected by catastrophic earthquakes in Armenia

Cultural heritage sites could not evade the adverse effects of catastrophic events either. Armenia ishome of many cultural heritage sites such as museums, medieval monasteries, monuments etc. Many ofArmenia’s centuries old monasteries— famous as research centers of art, literature, and philosophy—
have been destroyed by strong earthquakes, fires, and conflicts. These losses can be explained by theabsence of effective DRM plans.
This work discusses the safety of the Geological Museum of the Institute of Geological Sciences (IGS)at the H. Karapetyan and proposes a Disaster Risk Management (DRM) plan for it. The museum has
national importance and its collections have scientific and educational values. The natural and man-madehazards are identified, the most valuable objects are defined, and structural and organizational capacities,
and vulnerabilities are discussed. Adopting an integrated risk management approach, vulnerability
assessment of the most valuable objects has been carried out and urgent and yet feasible preparedness
and mitigation actions that could be carried out immediately are proposed. The plan also envisages
establishing close collaboration between various museums, municipal authorities, and emergency services
as long-term actions for disaster risk reduction. These actors and stakeholders are identified and mapped
based on a careful consideration of national local policies regulations and their involvement during andafter a disaster.

2. Qualitative Risk Assessment
Armenian research institutions were developed during the 20th-century. The Armenian Academy of
Sciences was established in 1935 and the Geological Museum after H. Karapetyan which was establishedin 1937. Since 2012, museum located on the ground floor of the main building of IGS. Having an
independent entrance enables fire fighters and other emergency personal to have a quick access tomuseum. On the other hand, any accident happening at the IGS chemical laboratories might pose a great
treat to the museum and its collection thus making it vulnerable to unexpected external events. In thiscontext, the museum cannot be analyzed in isolation from IGS.

104

2.12 Development of Disaster Risk Management plan for Geological Museum, Armenia

2.1. Identification of primary and secondary hazards
Yerevan is located in a seismically active region. Several closely located faults, soil conditions, climatechange, and the location of the museum makes it prone to several hazards such as earthquakes, floods,
fire, chemical leaks and/or explosions. Given the high probability of earthquakes, in this work earthquakes
are considered the main hazard and water leakage is taken as the secondary hazard to analyze cascadingrisks (Figure 1).

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

Figure 1. Natural and man-made hazards: Seismic hazard map of Yerevan (left), Elevation map of Yerevan as a proxy for flooding (middle), Location ofchemical laboratories (red rectangles, right)

2.2. Identification of values and prioritization of elements at risk
The main value of the museum lies in its mission to serve science and educate younger generations withknowledge about nature. It holds the memory of its founder, Prof. Karapetyan, whose private collection
became the source for the very first exhibition. The museum and its collections hold very importantaesthetic, historical, and economic values as well. Various minerals, fossils, mineral waters, and ancient andmedieval tools as well as many other samples turned the museum into an important depository of thetangible history of Armenia’s nature and culture. Along with tangible collection, the museum hosts oldscientific works, manuscripts of earlier geological, archaeological studies, and discoveries that provides
great understanding on historical scientific developments, scientists, etc. The values and the attributes are
summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Values and attributes of the geological museum

The purpose of this project is to develop a DRM plan to protect these values. It is important to understand,that various elements are affected differently during and after disasters. For instance, this collection ofminerals is unique. It consists of a variety of minerals on display in various shapes and forms. Therefore
damage to form and shape will reduce the value and importance of these objects to almost nothing.
Strong earthquakes pose great risk to the collection of minerals and fossils, while floods would becatastrophic for the manuscript collection and fossils since wet, organic substances could destroy them if
there is no timely and properly organized first aid.

105

Given the limited resources and feasibility of certain actions during disasters, the objects need to beprioritized. That can be achieved through close collaboration with the main beneficiaries of the museum.
Expert opinion of the museum staff, IGS researchers, and private collectors helped to prioritize the mostunique and important values and attributes held in the museum. Although the fossil of the elephant is
the most valuable object in the collection, the collection of minerals also has a significant aesthetic andscientific values that could be easily lost due to an earthquake. Earthquakes can destroy the form andwholeness of the minerals, while a chemical leak would cause total unrecoverable loss. Meanwhile, thecollection of manuscripts is more prone to be damaged by floods, fire and chemicals.

2.3. Qualitative analysis of the vulnerabilities

Vulnerability itself is a multidimensional concept. It depends on many parameters related to physical,
institutional, social, and economic components and processes. Qualitative analysis of the vulnerabilities
revealed that they can be classified in three groups according to their origin as structural, organizationaland governance. Structural vulnerabilities are referring to the vulnerability components related to building
conditions, planning, and emergency components. Organizational refers to the exhibition and locationof the objects. The museum’s managerial hierarchy puts additional pressures on developing institutional
vulnerability. This is due to poor governance. The findings of the vulnerability analysis are summarized inTable 2.

Table 2. Vulnerabilities and their description

Structural

CAUSE

106

DESCRIPTION

Old building

Building was built in 1937, when no building code existed

Poor maintenance

There is no stable temperature in the museum. Moreover, it is very humid and mold isvisible in some parts which can badly affect the fossils, documents’ collection

Not designed for a museum

The collection was moved to its current location in 2012 which is the ground floor of theinstitute building with a separate entrance.

Small doors and narrow corridor

The doors are small to evacuate many people in short time. Also the corridor is too narrow
and might be blocked by visitors

No early warning system

Anything happening in the museum may stay unnoticed for long time2.12 Development of Disaster Risk Management plan for Geological Museum, Armenia

Governance

Organizational

CAUSE

DESCRIPTION

Overcrowded exhibition

Exhibited objects are located too close to each other, without any boundaries

Improper object locations

The second exit is dead locked and completely behind several objects

Locked doors

The main entrance in half open. It is partially blocked by flower stands

Institutional management

There is no clear hierarchy in museums funding, reporting, support schemes

Staff

The staff is not prepared to cope with disaster event

Weak institutional links

No established links with ministries, emergency services

No DRM plan

There is no DRM plan

Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

3. Disaster Risk Management Plan
This work considers earthquake as the primary hazard, which triggers water and chemical leaks from themain IGS building and its laboratories. The Disaster Risk Mitigation plan is based on the following risk
scenario.
•

It is September 27, 11.20 AM. Mw = 7.1 earthquake strikes on Garni fault, 12 km from Yerevan.
The intensity of the earthquake at the museum site is 7.

•

The museum is hosting 30 school students who are watching a movie in the conference room
while the staff is working in the office .

As shaking starts, the students rush out with museum staff. The main and only entrance gets blocked
because the flower stands fall down and break the vases. Fortunately, students and staff manage to reachan open space in front of the museum without any injuries. Meanwhile, the earthquake damages thewater pipes, an accident happens in the chemical laboratory above and the museum starts getting wet.

107

3.1. Communicating DRM plan
Any plan needs to be properly communicated with interested and responsible actors that could be
involved in the DRM. That requires a very careful identification and mapping of every possible stakeholder,
actor, followed by describing the established and/or missing linkages between them. This is crucial not
only for preparedness and mitigation, but for the whole cycle of DRM from preparedness to recovery.
The quick mapping shows three big issues:•

Museum and its staff are not directly linked with the services such as basic, emergency despiteof their existence on national and municipal levels•

Some of the existing links work on one direction making vertical hierarchy•

There are strong personal links between museum management and other museums, IGS,
private collection owners.

This quick exercise revealed that it is urgent to establish direct links and/or strengthen the existing ones
between museum and municipal services. The second issue could be addressed by establishing a bilateralcollaboration rather than hierarchy. It will ease the communication and establish direct dialog aimed at
improving the overall governance. Institutionalization of the personal links will support the sustainable
development.

3.2. Preparedness and mitigation plan
Preparedness and mitigation are essential components of the DRM plan. Although they have quite
different definitions, it is quite hard taking them separately in practice. Mitigation is defined as “thelessening or minimizing of the adverse impacts of a hazardous event” while preparedness is seen
as “developed knowledge and capacities” (UNDRR, 2015). Essentially mitigation mostly refers to theengineering solutions aimed at risk reduction and preparedness is related to knowledge and capacity
development for the full DRM cycle. That is why discussing these two together helps aligning technicaland social factors of DRR. For the museum, the preparedness and mitigation has been categorized into
three main work packages: Improve coordination between actors and stakeholders, develop infrastructure
for risk mitigation, and capacity building for staff.
Each of these packages comprises several actions summarized in the following Table 3.
Table 3. Preparedness and mitigation plan: The main objectives and supporting actions

Goal

Actions
Define actors, responsibilities and roles during a disaster

Improve coordination

Make agreement for storage and technical support for restoration

between actors andEstablish direct links with municipal emergency services

stakeholders

Simplify administrative hierarchy
Identify possible funding sources
Install fire/emergency doors

Develop infrastructure Install fire detection system
for risk mitigation

Install evacuation signs
Free exits from blocking elements1082.12 Development of Disaster Risk Management plan for Geological Museum, Armenia

Create digital inventory, store it on a cloud to access it from outside the building
Organize trainings and drills on DRM
Capacity building for
staff

Map valuable objects
Get assistance from Emergency services to design evacuation routes and plans
Assign tasks, list the details of contact person/department in different agencies

3.3. Recovery plan
Outline of Disaster Risk Management Plans for Case Study Projects by ITC2019 Participants

The recovery plan should be part of the recovery of the larger IGS. It could be summarized in three tasks:
Identification of resources to facilitate quick recovery, prepare agreements with research institutions andmuseums for technical assistance in advance, and carry out physical recovery of the building (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Recovery tasks by type and actors

It is suggested to have several resources for the same task as a backup. For instance, Matenadaran
was fully reconstructed in 2010 and has up to date infrastructure to withstand earthquakes, fire,
flooding etc. But it might not be available if, for example, a more important and larger museum
such as National Gallery of Armenia is affected. In that situation the National library or archive
could be the partners in saving other museums collections. From all the possible funding sources
the power of the diaspora could be the most accessible given the large size of the Armenian
diaspora.
The museum can function only if the building is fully restored or retrofitted. The museum cannot
do much at this stage because of its tenant status, which could provide an opportunity andbenefit from the high status and importance of Academy of Sciences that will most probably
be recovered very quickly. The only crucial aspect at this stage is to work closely with Academy
administration and put the museum’s specific needs into larger reconstruction plans.

109

4. Conclusion
The museum has a complex management system: as a museum it is under supervision of Ministry ofeducation, science, culture and sport, while being an integral part of IGS at the same time. This complexity
brings some complications with assigning roles for the DRM plan’s implementation. This work reveals
poor governance and provides suggestions on how to improve it. The key outcomes are described in the
preparedness and mitigation plan that comprises the basic steps aimed at reducing the risks.

Reference
1.

Mason, R.: Assessing Values in Conservation Planning: Methodological Issues and Choices,
Research Report, The Getty Conservation Institute, Los Angeles, 2002.

2.

Van Balen, K.: The Nara grid: an evaluation scheme based on the Nara document on authenticity.
The Association for Preservation Technology International (APT), 39(2/3), 2008.

3.

The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction: Proposed Updated Terminology on
Disaster Risk Reduction: A Technical Review, 2015.

110

3 Activities Undertaken
after the International Training Course
by Former Participants

3.1

Implementation of Disaster Risk Management on
Cultural Heritage for George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site,
Malaysia

Ming Chee ANG
General Manager
George Town World Heritage Incorporated

1. Introduction
After the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015-2030) was adopted in March 2015, George
Town UNESCO World Heritage Site from Penang, Malaysia was selected as one of the three pilot casestudies for the “Capacity Building for Disaster Risk Reduction of Heritage Cities in Southeast Asia and Small
Island Developing States in the Pacific” by UNESCO. The other two cases selected under this project was
the Kota Lama Semarang in Indonesia and Levuka Historical Port Town in Fiji.
George Town World Heritage Incorporated (GTWHI) as the site manager agency responsible for George
Town UNESCO World Heritage Site has been given the responsibility to implement the project from April
2017. The aim of the project was to develop the disaster risk reduction strategies and integrate them into
the overall heritage management plan of the heritage cities. Using this opportunity, GTWHI was able toidentify the major hazards threatening the site, prepare the risk management plan specific for the heritage
area, and develop the disaster risk management mechanism and the draft DRR strategy.
This paper records the development and implementation of Disaster Risk Management for Cultural
Heritage in George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site, with a specific focus on the strategies and tools
developed using a community-based approach that has been proven to be among the major factors of
this strategy’s success since 2017.

2. Disaster Risk Management Cycle for Cultural Heritage
George Town Historic Cities of the Straits of Malacca was inscribed as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in
2008, and the Special Area Plan—a heritage management document—was gazetted in 2016 under the
Town and Country Planning Act 172. The priority in this document during the first decade (2008-2018)
was to safeguard and conserve the tangible cultural heritage of the site, and the Outstanding Universal
Value of the World Heritage Site.
After ten years as a World Heritage Site, the institutional and agency capacity within George Town has
gradually reached a steadier status, providing the ripe moment to enhance the Risk Management Planfor the town when the game changing opportunities reached through the UNESCO project in 2017.
Through the introductory teaching by the highly committed resource persons Dr Rohit Jigyasu and Ms
Aparna Tandon at the inception workshop in April 2017, important concepts such as hazard, exposureand vulnerability were introduced to the GTWHI team and the local communities who are the mainstakeholders of the World Heritage Site.
The gap of disaster management in George Town was identified when I was given the opportunity
to be trained under the UNESCO Chair Programme on Cultural Heritage and Risk Management at theInternational Training Course on Disaster Risk Management of Cultural Heritage in September 2017. The
management plan prepared during the training came into practice when George Town suffered from oneof the worst floods in the state’s history on 4 and 5 November 2017. From April to November 2017, George
Town completed the first full cycle of Disaster Risk Management Cycle for Cultural Heritage, including112

3.1 Implementation of Disaster Risk Management on Cultural Heritage for George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site, Malaysia

the preparation of the draft risk management plan, to conduct risk assessment during the disaster and toparticipate in the recovery and rehabilitation process.
Working under the belief and concept of ‘building back better’, George Town continues to evolveand improve its heritage resilience to disasters after the November 2017 flood. During the Disaster
Risk Reduction Strategy of George Town at the National Workshop on Harmonizing Coordination to
Implement Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy in the Heritage City of George Town in March 2018, local
leaders, politicians, media, and professionals were invited to participate and empower themselves on
disaster risk reduction capacity.
The attendance of important figures from the government, such as the Penang Chief Minister, theExecutive Secretary of the Malaysian National Commission for UNESCO, the mayor of the City Councilof Penang Island, the General Manager of Penang Hill Corporation, and the Director of Penang State
Activities Undertaken after the International Training Course by Former ParticipantsMuseum, amongst others, marked the shared commitment of the government and public sectors inenhancing the disaster risk reduction agenda in the public services of George Town, and in Penang. Morethan thirteen printed and online media, including Buletin Mutiara, The Star, and Sin Chew Jit Poh provided
media coverage of the event. The wide coverage in newspapers and online media has built a strong
branding and positive message on the Disaster Risk Recovery and Management strategy in George Town
and Penang.

Figure 1: Opening Ceremony of the National Workshop attended by the Chief Minister of Penang, the Mayor, and senior representatives ofcultural heritage related agencies in Penang in March 2018.

3. Implementing the Action Plans
With the active participation from sixty-four participants representing the central, state, and local levelgovernment, community associations and groups, civil defense, first responders, and site managers, theparticipants from the National Workshop in March 2018 have actively contributed to the developmentof the action plans. Ten action plans were developed as the direction of implementing disaster risk

113

management on cultural heritage for George Town. GTWHI was tasked to strategies the priority andimplementation of these action plans together with the members of the community. Each action plan iselaborated according to the planning context, implementing strategies, and the output achieved.
Action Plan 1
The National Disaster Management Agency to set up a committee to discuss legislation enhancement, e.g.
incorporating heritage related departments and agencies in the National Security Council’s Directive No.
20.

Implementation
Suggestions have been made to the National Disaster Management Agency to incorporate cultural
heritage elements in the National Security Council’s Directive No. 20. This includes the recommendations
to add the National Heritage Commissioner, State Heritage Commissioner, local Council Heritage
Department and World Heritage Site Managers into the Disaster Management Committee. We alsosuggested to add the Department of National Heritage (Federal Government Level), Department of
Heritage Conservation (Local Government Level) and World Heritage Site Manager Office (Site Manager
Level) into the Disaster Management Responding Agency. In addition, a recommendation was also
made to establish the Pusat Pengurusan Bahan Warisan (Heritage Materials Management Centre) forthe handling, packing and storing of salvaged heritage objects. To improve the legislation within theWorld Heritage Site, efforts were also taken by GTWHI, together with the Federal Department of Town
and Country Planning and the City Council of Penang Island to revise the George Town Special Area
Plan, with a new chapter on disaster risk management to be incorporated. On top of this, there is also
ongoing lobbying to revise the “Fire Safety Guidelines for Heritage Buildings” with the Malaysian Architect
Federation.
Action Plan 2
The Penang State Museum, clan jetties and clan houses will create an inventory list of cultural heritage
properties and artefacts, and for the master copy to be safeguarded by GTWHI.

Implementation
The major clan houses in George Town, such as Cheah Kongsi and Khoo Kongsi who already have the listsof their cultural heritage properties have agreed to share the inventory list of cultural heritage properties
and artefacts with GTWHI. There are also plans to collect important documents, such as measured
drawings, dilapidation reports, inventory lists of cultural objects, and other documentation from heritagebuildings owners in the George Town World Heritage Site by 2020. Efforts will also be made to assist thebuilding owners to develop the documents. Among the documentations that GTWHI hopes to store in the
databank system are measured drawings.
Action Plan 3
To organise a George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site Disaster Risk Reduction Coordinating Workshop.

Implementation
The contents of the disaster risk management for cultural heritage were developed and adapted fromthe D-MUCH version for the communities. There are seven pilot cases in the George Town community-114

3.1 Implementation of Disaster Risk Management on Cultural Heritage for George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site, Malaysia

based case studies on cultural heritage. The format also changes into a shorter time, longer intervention,and gradual introductions through four workshops. The First Workshop (4 Sept 2018) introduced
basic concepts in layman terms and with examples (Hazard, Vulnerability, Risk, Disaster/Emergencies,
Attributes), and conducted the site mapping and imagination game. During the Second Workshop (2
Nov 2018), participants were requested to share the disaster scenario, and mitigation for human lifeand cultural heritage. The participants also discussed their emergency response strategies. By the Third
Workshop (8 Jan 2019), the participants started to detail the risk analysis and identify possible stakeholders
and their roles before, during and after disaster. The participating cases were presented during the FourthWorkshop (22 March 2019), which also included the Standard Operation Plan of their cases, before, during
and after a disaster.
All participants were provided with technical assistance prior to their presentations to UNESCO andActivities Undertaken after the International Training Course by Former Participantssenior representatives from the Fire and Rescue Department of Malaysia during the Experience Sharing
Workshop on Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy among Heritage Cities in Southeast Asia, Pacific and Africa(21 June 2019). The cases that were presented are as follows:a.

George Town World Heritage Incorporated by Ms Shereen Loh Phaik See(Administrative Officer, GTWHI).

b.

Boon San Tong Khoo Kongsi by Mr Khoo Teng Khoonc.

Seh Tek Tong Cheah Kongsi by Mr Peter Cheah Swee Huat

(Trustee, Boon San Tong Khoo Kongsi).
(President, Seh Tek Tong Cheah Kongsi).
d.

Sia Boey by Ms Virajitha Chimalapati (Conservation Architect, GTWHI).

e.

Toh Aka Lane by Mr Teng Wei Yee (Resident from Toh Aka Lane).

f.

Lim Jetty by Mr Patrick Lim (Resident from Lim Jetty).

Action Plans 4, 5 and 6•

An early warning and response system will be developed, and UNESCO Jakarta toidentify sponsors to provide smoke detectors and fire extinguishers for every building
within the George Town World Heritage Site.

•

To set up emergency response teams, carry out equipment and tools maintenance,and hold trainings and drills.

•

To hold public awareness campaigns, conduct first aid and automated external
defibrillator trainings, promote to-go-bags and introduce first aid restoration for
artefacts.

Implementation

GTWHI announced the Community-Based Fire Preparedness and Response Strategy in major newspapers
and online platforms to invite qualified community members to participate in the programme in 30
January 2019. Premises owners or residents within George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site can submit
their applications online. Community members with no Internet access will need to visit the World
Heritage Site Manager office during office hours for assistance in submitting their applications. Fifty
applicants were selected under the current phase of the project. Selected participants would undergo

115

firefighting training, jointly organised by GTWHI and the Fire and Rescue Department of Malaysia. A public
ceremony was held to inaugurate the first batch of Community-Based Fire Responders with the presenceof the media and attended by senior representatives from the State Government of Penang. GTWHI willconduct house-to-house visits to all the participating units to review their basic fire protection measuresand provide advice for improvements. After the fifty applicants were selected, two training sessions werearranged for local residents in George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site and participants in April andMay 2019.

Figure 2: Fire extinguishers and smoke detectors were distributed to the participating communities from George Town after the training by
the Fire and Rescue Department of Malaysia.

The Emergency Response Team Training was conducted
on 4 and 5 May 2019, by Mr. Rafizi, the Head of the Fireand Rescue Department of the Beach Street Branch.
He provided the safety briefing and explained the roleof the Emergency Response Team. The second day of
the training focused on practical training such as basic
rescue techniques and hydrant drill at Seh Tek Tong
Cheah Kongsi. All the participants have undergone theEmergency Response Team training exam during thesecond day and all of them have received the 1kg dry
powder fire extinguisher and certificate for completingthe training and passing the exam.

Figure 3: Training by the Fire and Rescue Department of Malaysia to form
the George Town Emergency Response Team.

116

3.1 Implementation of Disaster Risk Management on Cultural Heritage for George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site, Malaysia

GTWHI also printed the Disaster Risk Management on Cultural Heritage posters in four languages,
which received great reception from the local community and government agencies. The design andcontent were based on the feedback received from the community during the first session of thecommunity workshop. Raising awareness through posters is believed to be the best approach for the local
communities as it includes the local context and is easier to be understood.

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Activities Undertaken after the International Training Course by Former Participants

Figure 4117

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15※ Fire extinguishers and smoke detectors were distributed to the participating communities from George Town after the training by the Fireand Rescue Department of Malaysia.

118

3.1 Implementation of Disaster Risk Management on Cultural Heritage for George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site, Malaysia

Action Plan 7
To develop a geographic information system (GIS) application in DRR.

Implementation
With fires being identified as one of the major disaster risks that threaten the World Heritage City ofGeorge Town, efforts have been made to map and identify the locations of fire hydrants in the World
Heritage Site. The time and route of arrival of the first responder have also been studied to ensure that firebrigades can arrive and provide help on time. GTWHI has enhanced the collaboration with the Fire andRescue Department of Malaysia in updating the location of fire hydrants in George Town, and to ensurethat all buildings in the World Heritage Site are in close proximity with a functioning fire hydrant.
Activities Undertaken after the International Training Course by Former Participants

Action Plan 8
To set a standard operational procedure for damage assessment.

Implementation
The GTWHI team refers to the “How to Undertake Integrated Post-Event Damage and Risk Assessment”
document prepared by Ms. Aparna Tandon and Dr. Rohit Jigyasu from ICCROM in the execution of thisinvestigation and preparation of this report. The Standard Operation Procedure on damage assessment
was first developed in December 2017 to access the landslide in Penang Hill, and the second opportunity
to use the form was in July 2019 when the GTWHI team was asked to assess the Bukit Mertajam Xuan Tian
Temple which was built in 1886 and caught fire at around 8.30pm on 3 July 2019.
Action Plan 9
To plan effective evacuation efforts during a disaster, e.g. creating a contact list of CCTV monitor IDs for
the City Council of Penang Island’s closed circuit television cameras operation centre and installing ‘panic
buttons’ at strategic locations.

Implementation
The City Council of Penang Island has installed 850 units of closed circuit television cameras equippedwith high-resolution technology at hotspots to monitor vehicle traffic, flash floods, and public safety.
About thirty flood sensor devices are installed in several flood-prone areas to help the council keep tabs
and track the occurrence of flash floods on the island and mobilise the authorities when needed. Water
levels are marked in green (normal, with water level below 75% of the height of the drain), yellow (alert),
orange (warning, when water level has reached 75% of the height of the drain) and red (danger, when
the road surface is flooded with the water level rising up to 250mm). Warning alerts will be channelled to
the City Council of Penang Island’s 24-hour hotline through SMS, and it will alert the City Council’s Squad
Pantas for immediate activation of their Standard Operating Procedure for early preparation in disasters.
Action Plan 10
GTWHI to work on heritage assessment and continuous monitoring for Penang Hill rehabilitation.

Implementation

GTWHI has offered peer and professional support to Penang Hill Corporation (PHC) since the November
2017 flood and landslides incidents. Equipment such as helmets, tools, and manuals were provided to119the PHC team to help them in assessing the damages and to rebuild the infrastructures on the hill. Afteralmost two years, PHC has carried out a large-scale Disaster Management Simulation Rescue Drill on 16
July 2019, involving more than 400 personnel from 15 agencies including the police, Fire and Rescue
Department, Malaysian Civil Defence Force, Health Department, and Penang Hill Residents Association.
It is a learning process from the major landslide in 2017 and they are ready to face the problem. Different
agencies learned to coordinate their efforts and make better decisions to be ready for real-life situations.
This includes the evacuation of train passengers to safety, the relocation of casualties via helicopter using
the emergency landing pad, and evacuation route with the four-wheel jeep.

4. Moving Forward
George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site is a cultural site with about 5,300 buildings, and 70% of thesebuildings are category I and II heritage buildings. The site also has some 10,000 residents, and more than
100,000 visitors and users daily. Through this Disaster Risk Management for Cultural Heritage in George
Town, efforts has been made to empower the local residents and users of the site. More importantly, thecapacity building on resiliency is crucial for the state of Penang to ensure that the people of Penang canembrace modernisation and community progression through disaster risk reduction embodied in alllevels of society, ranging from government authorities, organisations, private companies to individuals.
Cultural heritage is our shared asset and safeguarding them from disasters is our collective effort. Since
the inception workshop in April 2017, GTWHI has learnt that people are the most important resource
for a successful disaster risk management programme. The communication between heritage building
owners and local rescue departments are important to bridge the gap of information. The commitment
from local leaders in mobilising their people has become the factor of social capital that can enhance thetrust and effective sharing of information and training opportunities. The willingness of professionals incontributing their knowledge and time in this project will help GTWHI to work with more local residents,
building owners, and stakeholders, making George Town a better resilient city.

Figure 16: Representatives from the Fire and Rescue Department of Malaysia attended the site visit and provided suggestions to Mr. Cheah
(President of Seh Tek Tong Cheah Kongsi) to improve the disaster risk management plan.

120

3.1 Implementation of Disaster Risk Management on Cultural Heritage for George Town UNESCO World Heritage Site, Malaysia

Activities Undertaken after the International Training Course by Former Participants

Figure 17: GTWHI representative explaining the operation of fire extinguishers to the residents of Lim Jetty.

121

Appendix

List of Resource Persons(As of 2019 September)
Yoshio NAKATANI

Akira KANBE

Kenzo TOKI
Special Research Fellow,
Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural
Heritage, Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH)

Ryoko NISHIMURAManager,
The Nishimura Flower/
Kadohka (a flower arrangement artist),
Sagagoryu-master/
Representative of Takase-river council/
Town Planning Advisor/
Ponto-cho town management council

Chancellor,
The Ritsumeikan Trust/
President,
Ritsumeikan University

Takeyuki OKUBOUNESCO Chair Holder/
Professor,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
College of Science and Engineering,
Ritsumeikan University/
Director,
Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural
Heritage, Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH)
Rohit JIGYASUUNESCO Chair Holder/
Project Manager,
International Centre for the Study of the Preservation
and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM)
Dowon KIM
UNESCO Chair Holder/
Associate Professor,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
College of Science and Engineering,
Ritsumeikan University
Aparna TANDON
Project Manager,
Collections Unit,
International Centre for the Study of the Preservation
and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM)
Ksenia CHUMUTINA
Senior Lecturer in Sustainable and Resilient Urbanism
The School of Architecture,
Building and Civil Engineering,
Loughborough University
124

Vice-President,
Rit-sei area council,
Rit-sei area management committee/
Ponto-cho town management council

Ken OkadaHead,Secretariat Office of the National Task Force for the
Cultural Heritage Disaster Risk Mitigation Network,
Independent Administrative Institution
National Institutes for Cultural Heritage
Masamitsu FUJIMOTO
Associate Professor,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
College of Science and Engineering,
Ritsumeikan University
Nao NAKAYA
Research Fellow,
Department of Conservation science,
Kyoto National Museum
Yuuki IKENO
Chief Examiner,
Asago City Hall,
Board of Education Secretariat Cultural property
Division
Kyoutarou NAKAGAWA
Chief,
Asago City Hall,
Board of Education Secretariat Cultural property
Division

Tooru FUJIKI

Deputy Manager,

Go TANIBATA

Education Division

Miyazaki Sangyo-keiei University

Sayo Board of Education,
Planning Administration Office
Yasumichi MURAKAMI
Professor,
Kyoto Tachibana University
Atsushi KOMIYAAssistant Manager,
Cultural Asset Division,
Board of Education,
Kyoto Prefecture
Hiroki TANIGAWA
Director,
Cultural Property Promotion Office,Kansai Brunch,
NOHMI BOSAI LTD.

Kazunori IKEGAME
Deputy Manager,
Engineering Section 2,
Technical Department 2,
NOHMI BOSAI LTD.
Yoichiro KUSAKI
Coordinator,
Fire Alarm Equip. Admin. Section,
Technical Department 1,
NOHMI BOSAI LTD.
Wesley Webb CHEEK
Researcher (JSPS Post Doctoral Fellowship),Institute of Disaster Mitigation for Urban Cultural
Heritage, Ritsumeikan University (R-DMUCH)
Yoshihiro HIRAOKA
Professor,
Architecture Design Laboratory,
Department of Design Information,
Miyagi University

Rohit Kumar RANJITKAR
Nepal Director,
Kathmandu Valley Preservation Trust (KVPT)
Dulce Maria GRIMALDI SIERRA
Senior conservator for conservation and research of
decorative elements at archaeological sites,
Coordinación Nacional de Conservación delPatrimonio Cultural (CNCPC),
Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (INAH)
Yuko ISHIDA
Senior Researcher,
Kinugasa Research Organization,
Ritsumeikan University
Ming Chee ANG
General Manager,
George Town World Heritage Incorporated

Appendix

Tetsuyasu SAITOManager,
Fire Alarm Equip. Admin. Section,
Technical Department 1,
NOHMI BOSAI LTD.

Lecturer,

Shoichi KATSUDA
Cultural Property Chief,Fire Prevention Division,
Kyoto City Fire Department
Keiji YANO
Professor,
Department of Humanities, Geography Major,
College of Letters, Ritsumeikan University
Yoshifumi SATOFUKA
Professor,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
College of Science and Engineering,
Ritsumeikan University
Kenji SAWAI
Professor Emeritus,
Setsunan University
Shinta YOSHITOMI
Professor,
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
College of Science and Engineering,
Ritsumeikan University
125Rashmin GUNASEKERA

Senior Disaster Risk Management Specialist,
GSURR,

World Bank
Elke SELTER
Doctoral Researcher,
Centre on Conflict, Rights and Justice at SOAS,
University of London
Yoshinori IWASAKI
Principal Director,
Geo-Research Institute
Alessandra BORCHI
Coordinator and Operations Manager,
The UNESCO Heritage Emergency Fund,
UNESCO
Corine WEGENER
Director,
Smithsonian Cultural Rescue Initiative,
Office of the Provost/Under Secretary for Museums and Research,
Smithsonian Institution
Akiko UMEZU
Senior Specialist,
Unit of Risk Preparedness and Conservation in Use
Architecture Division,
Agency for Cultural Affairs
Kohei SAKAI
Senior Researcher,
OIC Research Organization,
Ritsumeikan University

126

List of Participants
Virginia Fernanda GONZALEZ

Samson Lukabya NABBIMBA(OMUTAKA NAKIGOYE)

Sarmiento Historic Museum,

KABAKA FOUNDATION

Museum Director,

Cultural Secretary of National Government
Angela Maria MICELI
Architect

AIAPP, Italian Association of Landscape Architecture
Monia DEL PINTOPhD Researcher,

Loughborough University
Mahrous Eid Moustafa ELSANADIDY
Chief Curator,

National Museum of Egyptian Civilization,
Nubia Fund,

KABAKA‘s Trail Coordinator,

Ameneh KARIMIAN

Independant Cultural Heritage and Disaster Risk
Management Researcher and Consultant
Shah Zahidur RAHMAN
Shelter Specialist,

UNDP Bangladesh
Lilit GEVORGYAN
Researcher,

Institute of Geological Sciences of National Academyof Sciences of Armenia

Appendix

Ministry of Antiquities
Enrique RODRIGUEZ LEON

Emergency Manager and Security, Response Unit,

Risk Management Department, City of Santa Elena
Clinton Dean JACKSONManager,National Inventory,

South African Heritage Resources Agency
Roy GIAMPORCARO

Junior Professional Officer in Cultural Heritage,
Culture Sector,

UNESCO Amman Office
Alessia STROZZI
Officer,

Ministry of Cultural Heritage,
Marche Region’s branch127

Photos of ITC 2019128

A Field Work for Risk Assessment in Ponto-cho, Kyoto

A Site Visit to a Traditional Japanese Townhouse at Ponto-cho, Kyoto

A Group Photo at Meiji Kotokan Hall at Kyoto National Museum, Kyoto

A Lecture of DRM System at Kyoto National Museum, Kyoto

An Exercise of Risk Assessment for collections at Kyoto Museum forWorld Peace, Kyoto

A Salvage Excercise

A Site Visit to Takeda Castle Ruins, Hyogo

A Site Lecture at Sawanotsuru Museum, Hyogo

A Site Visit to Kiyomizu-dera World Heritage Site, Kyoto

A Lecture of Environmental Water Supply System in Kiyomizu Area,
Kyoto

A Site Visit to a Preservation District at Sannenzaka Area, Kyoto

A Site Visit to Kyoto City Disaster Prevention Center, Kyoto

A Site Visit to Higashi Hongan-ji(Temple), Kyoto

Final Presentation of Case Study Projects and Discussion

A Farewell and Certificate Ceremony

Appendix

A Site Visit to Disaster Reduction and Human Renovation Institute in
Kobe, Hyogo

129